Unequally Yoked

Joseph may indeed picture Christ, and his marriage to a heathen woman may picture Christ redeeming us who are filthy sinners, (The same goes for the book of Haggai) but we do not get our doctrine out of word pictures from the Old or the New testament either for that fact. (like parables.) The doctrine for the age of grace, or for the church is clearly stated in Paul's epistles to the church in the New Testament. The Bible clearly states that we are not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers in II Cor. 6:14, and then it clearly gives us the reason.

God allowed Joseph, and Moses, and Haggai, and others, in His permissive will, to marry non-Jews for our example. These marriages were pictures that were to help us understand God's grace and mercy to sinners. I Cor. 10:11 He does not allow for this in the church, because the church is already redeemed and ransomed to Himself, and there is no fellowship of the redeemed with the unredeemed in the respect of marriage. This sends an entirely different picture- one of infidelity and impurity. The church is to be spotless, chaste, and clean.

 

I think it's quite a reach to assume Joseph's wife was unsaved. Don't forget that Joseph was where he was because the Egyptians recognized that the Spirit of God was in him.

Also, though second in command in Egypt the Egyptians still considered shepherds odious, and Joseph the Hebrew was seen as coming from a family of shepherds.

That would imply to me that his wife took on the same reproach by virtue of her union with him.

That' my two cents anyway .

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Aaron ]

 

No, it was a picture of Christ's redemption. (past tense) The church is already redeemed, and that is why we can not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. Those men in the OT were Jews, and they married Gentiles. Christ was working primarily with the Jews then, and these marriages were pictures of what was to come- Christ would also offer salvation to the Gentiles and then primarily work through the church.

The things in the OT happened for the church's example, but the church is now already redeemed. That example became null and void to the world (except to show us what happened) when the Law was fulfilled, and there is a new example given in Corinthians. Light can not have fellowship with darkness.

 

Why are we making Joseph a type of Christ? Does Scripture do this somewhere?? I think we play a dangerous game when we start assigning types that aren't identified by Scripture. Just because something has some similarities does not make it a type.

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

Ok,

Ill show my ignorance here.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>When making Joseph a 'type' of Christ, are we going to far to say that God put His blessing on the marriage between born-again Joseph and unsaved Asenath? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How can Joseph be born-again when Jesus has not yet lived and died for our sins? I know that the Jews were saved by God, but they needed to make sacrifices to Him to atone for their sins. Isn't being born-again a NT concept?

Bill

 

Juat a phraseology(?) thing I reckon.
He had Faith in the true God,& that faith was manefested in his works,i. e. his obediance to the leadership of God.
Oh...Hello Bill!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HappyBaptist:
I started this Post because my Sunday School teacher taught Joseph as a type of Christ and I felt that it was taken too far when Joseph married an unsaved (Gentile) woman because Jesus took the Gentiles as His 'bride.'

I am uneasy with the 'type' thing because I don't see in Scripture where we are told to do this. When Jesus gave us parables, He told us what they meant.

Pastor's tell us to take God's Word for what it says. Then, the same fella will give us all kinds of stuff that I just do not see!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Could not agree more with you on much of what you said and I know your frustrations. I probably would have been one of those guys you got frustrated with. That is how I was taught in school and by the example of other preachers. Find a text, make it into three or more points, grab some illustrations and off you go. When pastors, like myself in the past, see the OT as nothing more than a giant illustration book we will use the same OT story or figure to teach 100 different things. Same thing is done with Christ’s life or miracles. Find the one you think illustrates the point you want to make and use it regardless of the context it is in. Instead of letting the Bible teach us, some are guilty of using the Bible to teach what they want. Some of the worse and most embarrassing twists of scripture I’ve heard have come from special speakers such as evangelist and missionaries, and donation raising speakers. Problem is most people are not frustrated like you are. Many like myself, in the past, daydream through or gullibly accept everything said. Worse yet the entertainment quality is often more important than the truthfulness or faithfulness to the scripture being used. Glad to hear someone else is frustrated by this.

 

&lt; I know that the Jews were saved by God, but they needed to make sacrifices to Him to atone for their sins. &gt;

Hebrews 10:11-- Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins;

 

PackerBacker,
I agree. I actually heard a person preaching say at the beginning, "I had figured out my topic and main points, but the Scritpures I kept finding didn't agree with what I was trying to say

Scary to think that the Bible was not the foundation for the preaching, but the means to an end, or the "illustration Book" as you put it.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HappyBaptist:
They believed that Jesus was going to die on the cross for their sins .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where in the OT scriptures do you see this?

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HappyBaptist:
[QB One of those things that I have always believed and never challenged on. In the back of the Thompson Chain Reference Bible there is a whole list on pages 246-249. I realize that EVERYONE does not believe that this is what these Scriptures say, but here they are (and this, I believe).
[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

None of these verses specify belief in a Messiah to come as a prerequisite for salvation. The may all prophesy of the Messiah to come but at no place is a person in the OT told "Believe in the Messiah to come." I believe a lot of people, like you, have always thought this but have never stopped to consider it scripturally. I am not denying that people in the OT were saved by faith. Nor am I arguing that they were saved apart from Christ. However, at no place are they told to believe in Christ to come. However, we are off topic here and so I will desist.

 

Happy Baptist, a couple of thoughts. If Joseph is a type of Christ, it is best to see the bride as non-jewish. It isn't necessarily Gentile. The church isn't gentile. There is neither Jew, nor Gentile... in Christ.

Second, the born-again question you brought up is valid. However, Jesus spoke to Nicodemus about being born-again as if he should have known about it.