Parenting Police.

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

It is not an immediate family when they live in somebody else's house under some other person's rule.

Like when my son or friends or other family comes to my house then I feed them or give them a place to sleep and more, but when they go home they are still friends and family but they feed themselves at their own home. That is immediate family and then extended family and outside family.

But immediate family means those under our own roof.

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

I disagree. Notice the operative word "anyone" in the verse I provided.

This is really a conversation we can have outside of this thread, no reason to confuse JPC's addled brain anymore than it already is, but is the verse supposed to stand on its own, or taken in context with the other verses?

The verses before 5:8 deal with Widows, how they are to be treated, looked upon, thought of etc. The anyone in 5:8 is anyone who died and didnt take care of their family, and they are worse than unbelievers.

Want to get into the whole Mustard Seed debate again?

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

It is not an immediate family when they live in somebody else's house under some other person's rule.

So, if I come and take your car out of your driveway, it's no longer your car?

So you are saying that because your child, from your own seed, is no longer part of your immediate family because you couldn’t make things work in your marriage and, as a result, don’t have custody of your own child? That, even though you had this child (not his fault) and couldn’t make your marriage work (not his fault), you are no longer responsible for his well-being and support? The law is flawed in making it YOUR fault for creating all the circumstances that would potentially leave the child without a father and without any form of support?

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

I disagree. Notice the operative word "anyone" in the verse I provided.

I am not saying the scripture verse is wrong.

"If anyone doesn't take care of his own relatives, especially his immediate family, he has denied
the Christian faith and is worse than an unbeliever." 1 Tim 5:8

I am just saying that it does not apply to any separated and the unjust child support.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

This is really a conversation we can have outside of this thread, no reason to confuse JPC's addled brain anymore than it already is, but is the verse supposed to stand on its own, or taken in context with the other verses?

The verses before 5:8 deal with Widows, how they are to be treated, looked upon, thought of etc. The anyone in 5:8 is anyone who died and didnt take care of their family, and they are worse than unbelievers.

Want to get into the whole Mustard Seed debate again?

I have to agree that I don't think this line was just about widows. The line right before it (5:7) "Give the people these instructions, too, so that no one may be open to blame". There's a lot in the preceding 7 lines to imply it's talking about widows, for sure, but more as well.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

I am not saying the scripture verse is wrong.

"If anyone doesn't take care of his own relatives, especially his immediate family, he has denied
the Christian faith and is worse than an unbeliever." 1 Tim 5:8

I am just saying that it does not apply to any separated and the unjust child support.

Do you really believe that just because your son didn't live with you he was no longer your immediate family? You're really a part of a psychology experiment to see how far you can push rational people, right?

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

So, if I come and take your car out of your driveway, it's no longer your car?

So you are saying that because your child, from your own seed, is no longer part of your immediate family because you couldn’t make things work in your marriage and, as a result, don’t have custody of your own child? That, even though you had this child (not his fault) and couldn’t make your marriage work (not his fault), you are no longer responsible for his well-being and support? The law is flawed in making it YOUR fault for creating all the circumstances that would potentially leave the child without a father and without any form of support?

I guess you missed my post # 201 just a couple post before this one. It really answers your post click HERE.

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by This_person

Do you really believe that just because your son didn't live with you he was no longer your immediate family? You're really a part of a psychology experiment to see how far you can push rational people, right?

You really beat things to death.

For me: I post what I really mean, and I really mean what I post.

I really really do not believe in doing otherwise and to say what one does not mean is a fools game that I try never to play.

It is only a word.

If you call a relative in a different State your immediate family then so be it for you. I do not call that an immediate family member.

And since we are talking about scripture then my interpretation is valid as anyone else's and your badgering the one word does not persuade me.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

You really beat things to death.

For me: I post what I really mean, and I really mean what I post. Even when I make no sense and contradict myself midsentence!

I really really do not believe in doing otherwise and to say what one does not mean is a fools game that I try never to play.

It is only a word.

If you call a relative in a different State your immediate family then so be it for you. I do not call that an immediate family member.

And since we are talking about scripture then my interpretation is valid as anyone else's and your badgering the one word does not persuade me.

I only beat things to death because you don't answer and I have to keep on you to get you to answer.

It's mighty convenient for you to not see someone as family unless they live in your house. I presume that means you don't consider your son immediate family now (you don't live with him, do you?), nor his offspring his immediate family since he doesn't live there anymore.

This gives me insight into why you believe it's immoral to provide for your own children when you are the non-custodial parent. You completely believe that they are no longer your immediate family! So, since you raised the military in the past on this issue, I'll raise to you - what about a child in boarding school? Are they no longer immediate family?

What if you and your son were neighbors when he grew up with a man for a step-dad to guide him? Are neighbors close enough to be immediate family? What if they live in the guest house out back? Same property, but different roof. Is that immediate family?

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by This_person

I have to agree that I don't think this line was just about widows. The line right before it (5:7) "Give the people these instructions, too, so that no one may be open to blame". There's a lot in the preceding 7 lines to imply it's talking about widows, for sure, but more as well.

Theres alot in the preceding 7 lines? ... ok the entire 5:2 through 5:16 is about Widows. The entire premise of 1 Timothy 5:xx is about how to look after, think of, care about, Widows and Elders.

Sorry, but if thats the way you want to read the verses, this will REALLY open up discussions about Radicalism in the faiths

Psyops meant well with his verse, and if you read it out of Context it sounds like an excellent refute of JPC.

Unfortunately it isnt a verse about family they are verses about taking care of Widows. Now if only JPC had croaked before he ABANDONED his kid .

Originally Posted by 1 Timothy 5:1 through 5:16

5:1 Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;
5:2 The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.
5:3 Honour widows that are widows indeed. (Honor Widows, as long as they are desolute and trust and are supplicant unto God, Atheist Widows are worthless?)
5:4 But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God.
5:5 Now she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day.
5:6 But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth. (If a Widow isnt Desolate and lives life with Pleasure then she is dead, and not worth honor)
5:7 And these things give in charge, that they may be blameless.
5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. (Those that didnt provide for their family or Widow are worse than an infidel)
5:9 Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man. (Dont help a Widow unless shes older than 60)
5:10 Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work. (Dont help a Widow unless shes well thought of)
5:11 But the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry;
5:12 Having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith.
5:13 And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not. (Younger Widows are Idle busybodies and tattlers)
5:14 I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.
5:15 For some are already turned aside after Satan.
5:16 If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.