Hyphenated last names

[ValleyGal]

It is for the same reason that the lineage in the Bible is primarily of males.

The model we have from scripture should be honored as correct for all the right reasons: Taking the man's last name is a demonstration of "coming under" the authority of God. This is a practice of doing what is right by God, that we can either participate in or turn against. The meaning is elaborated upon in the marriage of Christ to His bride, the church, as becoming "One" (as opposed to, together but not one).

Hyphenated names, means: Together, but separate, not One.

Are you suggesting that just because I did not take my husband's name, that I do not submit myself under God's authority, and that I don't "do right" by God? My submission to God and doing right by him have absolutely nothing to do with what my last name is... and two becoming one also has nothing to do with last names. I addressed this earlier in the thread, saying that anyone who lives with someone for 50 years is bound to become as one with them, no matter what their last names are. In fact, chances are even those who are not even legally married will become as one with a lifelong partner.

My love and submission to God and my commitment to my husband are not predicated on changing my name.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Well...I guess I'm 0 for 3 in the "real marriage" sweepstakes....kept my name, separate bank accounts and no kids...

 

[ScottA]

No I'm not obscuring anything. They didn't need surnames at that time to reach your conclusion. If it wasn't need then - its not needed now. I believe Joseph and Mary were one without it. According to your opinion - they were not. In marriage he (God) brings the oneness to the couple. That is the only true name they need for that to happen.

So, on the contrary - you sir - are handing out the mumbo jumbo as you call it.

God's ways do not change, and yet according to you? It seems they do. Surnames is what is modern. Lineage has always been there with or without the surname.

Surnames is something your brought up - not me. Nor did I suggest that God has changed anything - He has not.

I started at the beginning, defined what it means to use [any] hyphenated names, and gave the biblical precedence. Pretty simple.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

Ancient Israel would have identified themselves by either "son of" or "daughter of". So...Jesus would have been known as "Yeshua bin Yosef". His sisters would have been known as "Name ben Yosef". A woman kept her clan/tribe/family identity even after marriage. Last names are a recent invention.

 

[HannahT]

Surnames is something your brought up - not me. Nor did I suggest that God has changed anything - He has not.

I started at the beginning, defined what it means to use [any] hyphenated names, and gave the biblical precedence. Pretty simple.

Actually, you did with the below. You mentioned it was a 'demonstration', and yet no demonstration was ever needed before under these terms until modern times when people wanted to question things. Sure anyone can claim 'people are together, but separate, not one' due to the change of times. They can't back it up though, since God is the one that made them one flesh. Other's opinions on the matter don't count.

The rest of what you said? Sounds like manipulation to get a rise out of people - which you seemed to have accomplished with some posters. You seem you have changed what God has placed in the bible with proclamations of your own. It doesn't work that way. So, yes you did suggest that God has changed things. Lineage is so much more than a name.

God has no surname, last name or anything else. Yet, we are his bride - the church. He quotes other requirements to come under his authority, and family names isn't even a factor.

It is for the same reason that the lineage in the Bible is primarily of males.

The model we have from scripture should be honored as correct for all the right reasons: Taking the man's last name is a demonstration of "coming under" the authority of God. This is a practice of doing what is right by God, that we can either participate in or turn against. The meaning is elaborated upon in the marriage of Christ to His bride, the church, as becoming "One" (as opposed to, together but not one).

Hyphenated names, means: Together, but separate, not One.

 

[ScottA]

Actually, you did with the below. You mentioned it was a 'demonstration', and yet no demonstration was ever needed before under these terms until modern times when people wanted to question things. Sure anyone can claim 'people are together, but separate, not one' due to the change of times. They can't back it up though, since God is the one that made them one flesh. Other's opinions on the matter don't count.

The rest of what you said? Sounds like manipulation to get a rise out of people - which you seemed to have accomplished with some posters. You seem you have changed what God has placed in the bible with proclamations of your own. It doesn't work that way. So, yes you did suggest that God has changed things. Lineage is so much more than a name.

God has no surname, last name or anything else. Yet, we are his bride - the church. He quotes other requirements to come under his authority, and family names isn't even a factor.

I said "last name" simply because that is where the thread topic began...not because first or last names have anything to do with it. That seems to have made you go off on a tangent. But the point is not that at all.

The point is that lineage is chronicled in God's word for the very reason I stated: showing His lordship, and our allegiance. But if we hyphenate or divide our allegiance, in name...we ourselves have divided what God has joined together.

If you think that is okay...you're wrong.

 

[ValleyGal]

But if we hyphenate or divide our allegiance, in name...we ourselves have divided what God has joined together.

Do you have any idea how offensive it is to question my integrity to keep my commitment to my husband and to God based on a cursory knowledge that I have kept my last name, when you have no idea about the integrity of my character? Allegiance is shown in character, not in a name.

 

[Dave-W]

Ancient Israel would have identified themselves by either "son of" or "daughter of". So...Jesus would have been known as "Yeshua bin Yosef". His sisters would have been known as "Name ben Yosef". A woman kept her clan/tribe/family identity even after marriage.

Wow. that is REALLY messed up. Bin? Really? we are not talking Arabic here

The "son of" in Hebrew is ben and in Aramaic it is bar.
For "daughter of" it is bat.

And for daughters, it was often (but not always) daughter of the mother. So HIS sisters could be known as [name] bat Miriam.

Last names are a recent invention.

At least that part is true.

 

[HannahT]

I said "last name" simply because that is where the thread topic began...not because first or last names have anything to do with it. That seems to have made you go off on a tangent. But the point is not that at all.

The point is that lineage is chronicled in God's word for the very reason I stated: showing His lordship, and our allegiance. But if we hyphenate or divide our allegiance, in name...we ourselves have divided what God has joined together.

If you think that is okay...you're wrong.

Actually, if you read the title of the thread...its about hyphenated last names. Not 'simply' last names. You condemned people with the hyphenated names with your own proclamation, and claimed it was God's. I'm not sure why you are trying to divert at this point, because I even quoted your statement in my last post.

Hyphenated names can't divide people's allegiance. You seem to give to much power to a human's name. Placing judgement on others over such nonsense is indeed adding to God's word. You seem to feel that is okay, and your wrong.

Do you have any idea how offensive it is to question my integrity to keep my commitment to my husband and to God based on a cursory knowledge that I have kept my last name, when you have no idea about the integrity of my character? Allegiance is shown in character, not in a name.

ValleyGal - some people are more caught up in adding to scripture instead of just accepting what is there. I think at times they get a special sense of power doing this, and it shows up with the approach. Yet, they have no power in the true sense. There is no power in bitterness.

Sadly, many feel that shaming others into switching to their viewpoint is acceptable. You don't find that approach in the bible, but you do find it among humans to many times. I find it is the lazy approach personally. The world is full of those that use shame, guilt, manipulation as their weapons of choice. In their arrogance they normally justify it somehow, and again try to turn around on others. People of true integrity, character, and are lead by the Holy Spirit can disagree with fellow believers without that approach. It's sad if you think about long enough! The bible says the gate in small and the path narrow, and many will not find it. All we can do is pray for those that pay games with God's word. Disagreement and Debate should never take such a destructive path, and to me it just shows a hard heart.

 

[ScottA]

Actually, if you read the title of the thread...its about hyphenated last names. Not 'simply' last names. You condemned people with the hyphenated names with your own proclamation, and claimed it was God's. I'm not sure why you are trying to divert at this point, because I even quoted your statement in my last post.

Hyphenated names can't divide people's allegiance. You seem to give to much power to a human's name. Placing judgement on others over such nonsense is indeed adding to God's word. You seem to feel that is okay, and your wrong.

You act as if the things of life have no connection to what God has planned for the world, as if He has not counted every hair and considered every name. Meanwhile, a hyphenated name by definition IS "divided"...and you deny it, as if God were not paying attention. None of which is on me.

 

[ScottA]

Are you suggesting that just because I did not take my husband's name, that I do not submit myself under God's authority, and that I don't "do right" by God? My submission to God and doing right by him have absolutely nothing to do with what my last name is... and two becoming one also has nothing to do with last names. I addressed this earlier in the thread, saying that anyone who lives with someone for 50 years is bound to become as one with them, no matter what their last names are. In fact, chances are even those who are not even legally married will become as one with a lifelong partner.

My love and submission to God and my commitment to my husband are not predicated on changing my name.

Not knowing what you are doing (wrong)...you are forgiven of. But that does not make it right. God has established standards and meaning to many things such as this, which we all are likely guilty of on some level. But the subject here in this thread is the meaning of hyphenated names...and, Yes, by God's biblical precedence, you have unknowingly, demonstrated a division in the middle of what God has [intentionally] made One.

 

[mkgal1]

everything I have offered...is in complete alignment with the matter of my precedence.

There's a simple explanation for why that's all in "complete alignment" and it doesn't have anything to do with God (or the Bible).

 

[LaSorcia]

When I got married, I wanted both my husband and I to change our last names to one of our own choosing. This didn't happen, so I kept my own last name, which I went to court to get, since I wanted my own name.

Our children have hyphenated last names. I pushed those babies out; they get my name.

 

[ScottA]

There's a simple explanation for why that's all in "complete alignment" and it doesn't have anything to do with God (or the Bible).

The precedence is God's. Stop misquoting me.

 

[ScottA]

When I got married, I wanted both my husband and I to change our last names to one of our own choosing. This didn't happen, so I kept my own last name, which I went to court to get, since I wanted my own name.

Our children have hyphenated last names. I pushed those babies out; they get my name.

See...that's the problem. Those babies were a gift from God, and you pushing them out gives you no claim of ownership...even if you can name them. We have gone from giving credit where credit is due, to entitlement over our lives as if we gave it. There's nothing right about that.

 

[LaSorcia]

It's certainly more equitable for a woman who grew and delivered a baby to give it her last name than a man who provided half the DNA and nothing further at the point of birth to give the only last name to the child. This happens all the time. Does that imply ownership?

 

[Verve]

But, you don't "own" people…that's slavery.

 

[ScottA]

It's certainly more equitable for a woman who grew and delivered a baby to give it her last name than a man who provided half the DNA and nothing further at the point of birth to give the only last name to the child. This happens all the time. Does that imply ownership?

(Please use the reply feature...so we know who you are addressing)

No, there is no biblical precedent for either the biological mother or father...but there is for God. The customs that people have adopted for names come from every angle, but the only one that we should be paying attention to, is that if God is our Father, and Christ our Husband...we should be happy to represent the naming of children after their father, as He has given us in the pattern of original marriage, and the chronicles of His people.

For the same reason, the standard is that men be leaders in the church, and women should even be silent: NOT because a man has any greater standing or qualification...but because God is trying to tell us something in the way He has patterned such things.

So...we can be self-centered, claim some entitlement for ourselves...or we can...listen, and learn.

 

[LaSorcia]

(Please use the reply feature...so we know who you are addressing)

No, there is no biblical precedent for either the biological mother or father...but there is for God. The customs that people have adopted for names come from every angle, but the only one that we should be paying attention to, is that if God is our Father, and Christ our Husband...we should be happy to represent the naming of children after their father, as He has given us in the pattern of original marriage, and the chronicles of His people.

For the same reason, the standard is that men be leaders in the church, and women should even be silent: NOT because a man has any greater standing or qualification...but because God is trying to tell us something in the way He has patterned such things.

So...we can be self-centered, claim some entitlement for ourselves...or we can...listen, and learn.

I'm afraid we have fundamental disagreements; but we are still siblings in Christ. God bless.

 

[ValleyGal]

I'm afraid we have fundamental disagreements; but we are still siblings in Christ. God bless.

Ditto.