Ignominious Emirakan wrote: the fallacious idea that the apostles and our Lord Jesus Christ quoted from a Greek translation called the Septuagint, or the LXX.
I had uncritically accepted this as a truth listening to James White. It may/may not be true that our Lord quoted from the LXX rather then the Hebrew text, but this truth matters.
Interesting this KJV debate. I don't believe this deification of Erasmus as that single point of inerrant infallible truth. But it doesn't take much to see that, while claimed to be founded on better MSS, these better versions are a product of profiteers and butcherers of Gods word. Bar none!
Its unfortunate and frustrating, but this attack is expected!
I never got a chance to state my personal position because... we needed to got to the truth first.
The Holy Spirit records or us the words of Jesus in the bible Jesus said something. That something was at odds with what the church preaches. The church preaches what appears as out of compassion and mercy.
Problem is, that's not what Jesus said. I know two things for sure. 1) ALL the appearance of mercy the church holds collectively doesn't amount to a hill of beans in front of a loving God. 2) I cannot question Gods wisdom.
When Jesus came, he said no divorce! If you see it differently, so be it. But that's where the church needed to start. Not a place to thump people, and not a place to unscramble what had been done. Because nobody can make it! The only thing for the church to do in declaring Gods truth, was to look for grace and mercy at the foot of the cross.
Its not about divorce. I don't want to change Gods word. I want to start with the truth and rely on his mercy and grace. I don't need a loving church to help God out
Kev wrote: Matthew 19:9 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Here it is same words just reordered. I think this is pretty clear: Whosoever shall put away his wife and shall marry another committeth adultry except for fornication.
Kev wrote: The whosoever shall marry her who is put away is addressing that...she is still bound to her husband as whoever marries her commits adultry. The husband in the example is not an adulterer..
Where are you getting this from, "The innocent party is free to Marry and is not an adultery"?
In Mt19, the mans remarriage is adulterous because it was not on grounds of fornication. From this divorce, the woman's remarriage is adulterous. (Jesus goes further- the man is guilty for causing this.)
What you've done is disconnected the two parts and said, if the woman's marriage is adulterous, then she must have done something and the man is innocent.
Kev wrote: Matthew 19:9 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, EXCEPT it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso MARRIETH HER which IS PUT AWAY doth commit adultery.
Matthew 5:31-32 31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put AWAY HIS WIFE, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, CAUSETH HER to commit adultery: and whosoever shall MARY HER that is divorced COMMITETH ADULTRY.
The cheating party is bound the other is loosed. Thatâs how I read it.
In Mt19:32, The innocent wife that is being put away is being CAUSED to commit adultery by remarrying -because she is innocent. The person marrying her is also committing adultery.
Except for FORNICATION, (whatever this is,) ALL remarriages (including the non cheating ones) are adulterous.
Kev wrote: Divorce based on fornication is based more than on these two clear verses: Matthew 5:31-32 31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, SAVING for the CAUSE OF FORNICATION, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. Matthew 19:9 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, EXCEPT it be FOR FORNICATION, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commiteth adultery. Except means except.
Sorry! I used the word divorce in the contemporary sense, in the sense how we use it, - what it does to marriage where you are free to remarry. If âdivorceâ does not allow remarriage then thatâs separation.
So in Mathew, itâs the REMARRIAGE that is adultery What is fornication. What is THAT divorce (what it does) on marriage to allow for remarriage not being an adultery.
itâs not a trick question. Thereâs no agenda. We need to be honest & truthfull in arriving at Gods word wherever it leads to
The whole of the churches divorce position is built ONLY from Mt19/Mt5, out of the âexcept for fornicationâ clause.
Jesus actually ABOLISHES divorce here, not set the condition. The clause allows an exception to a Jewish betrothal where marriage hasn't yet occurred!
In Mt19 it didnât work! Letâs look at Mt5:31-32
At just a mere mention of fornication, there's a headlong rush to artificially impose this as a condition for divorce, even where itâs not called for.
In Mt19:31 Jesus is only referring back to where divorce itself was given, NOT THE CONDITION. In the midst of a long run of, âIt hath been said/ But I sayâ sayings, in V32 Jesus ABOLISHES Mosesâ divorce itself. From this, it is clear to the Jews what is implied of his authority.
Ignoring all that, the church gets its divorce.
The Jews starting position is Mosesâ authority to divorce. Inside of that, ALL the positions were debated.
In V32, with no Jewish challenges getting in the way, and no one to say otherwise, the church has Jesus state his condition â one opinion amongst many already there. The charge in Mt19 was against the permissive divorce. Here, what the church gets is not the most restrictive in the range either, because it wonât work! fornication is amorphous and changes dependin
Chris, every Christian is uncompromising, but growing in Gods grace. Some confuse legalism for uncompromising.
There's a perception that MY views are extreme. But whatever Gods truth is, God has spoken, and it's Final! Jesus says remarriage is adultery.I want to show only from scripture.
Mt19:3 the Jews ask for what the church claims to have. V7 the Jews are asking why then Moses allowed it? You cannot be glib here of this change in direction!! V10 The disciple who had never thought to have questioned Moses, are stunned to now hear only death breaks marriage bond.
V9 To a Jewish audience, Jesus summarizes using distinct terms allowing for betrothal, 'EXCEPT FOR FORNICATION REMARRIAGE IS ADULTERY.'
Its here that the church gets its loot, "See! He said 'except for!'" Honestly! If you ignore the narrative!
Nowhere in scripture is the church in a confident place to receive what it has. What it has, 'God Hates!' The church causes people to stumble and sin by prescribing sin! Jesus says remarriage is adultery. The church presents itself as a bleeding heart intermediary mitigating a heartless God! Its a serious thing to change Gods word or to usurp His authority.
I will show clearly from scripture this is happening!
Any honest examination will show that the church artificially imposes divorce on scripture, against the explicit command of God. If true, then all who participate are guilty.
If Jesus is saying that divorce is adultery, then not only is divorce a sin but those who join as a church in allowing divorce causes others to stumble and commit this sin.
There's grace and forgiveness for when we fail. But nowhere are we asked to prescribe sin and invoke grace. The church's position, and all who are party to it, are in an ongoing state of rebellion against God
Its nothing to wink at, and its not about not being a deacon. All who out of pride in their knowledge of scripture, and a blind loyalty to the magisterium of the church along with its handed down tradition, causes others to sin, remain unrepentant!
Too many draw from inferences, allegories & 'whole counsel,' over and above explicit statements. lets allow all positions J4. But its immaterial because of Jesus' stance on divorce.
Mt 19 Jews ask, where's the line? Jesus says, one flesh - can't be separated. (Hebrew root for divorce -hewn cut out)
Jews say, then why Moses allowed. The focus of this question has turned from WHERE's the line, to WHY the authority to divorce. Jesus, "Because of the hardness.. but not so from beginning."
This focus changes from Where, to WHY Moses (on Gods authority) allowed!
The Jews asked the first question pointedly- where's the line? But the 'except for' was NOT given there. The answer there was, 'inseparable.'
The 'except for' in Mt 19 is given at the end as a summary statement after God has defined the unique oneness & inseparability of marriage, and only to cover the context of the Jewish betrothal system.
Ignoring the question answer tandem, the church gets it's divorce's demarcation line from this summary by imposing the question again. Weak!
Even so, Moses' divorce is a practice that Jesus says comes from the hardness of your heart. The church's Mt19 prescribes, as an ongoing state of practice, what grieves God!
During the time of Jesus, there were two prevailing and competing rabbinical thoughts on divorce, a byproduct of the Mosaic law. One very liberal, the other restricting only to adultery.
Mt 19: 7And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 7They say unto him, WHY DID MOSES THEN COMMAND TO GIVE A WRITING OF DIVORCEMENT, and to put her away?
ODD! Mt 19:6 The Pharisees start this by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce on ANY GROUNDS?"
Did they just mishear Jesus? They're now asking why then Moses allow divorce.
Now, endless sermons are built around this aha moment, that the Pharisees said Moses COMMANDED when it should have been 'PERMITTED'. That that's what this exchange is about. NO! It was a command! It was for the CERTIFICATE! Moses didn't COMMAND divorce! Ludicrous to charge Pharisees with!
Still! Odd! These pastors build around what they interpret Jesus said. If they're right that Jesus allowed !divorce, the Pharisees heard it wrong!
There is nothing coincidental about that encounter with the woman at the well, by the way. And Jesus isn't addressing divorce here.
But on divorce, whatever the Samaritan cultural standards, Mosaic Law permitted it. When the Jews refer back to that, Jesus instead goes all the way back to the creation order, 'From the beginning it was not so.' God sees marriage as 'one flesh,' therefore what God has joined, let not man put asunder'
Look at the language in Mk10. 'One flesh' cannot be separated, what God has joined.
Of the Mosaic divorce, Jesus says it was 'because of the hardness of your heart,' but 'from the beginning it was not so'!
Wait! This is Gods clear! explicit! injunction! NOT to do something because it 'comes from the hardness of your heart'!! No confusion, God clearly stating it!
Despite that, yet this so completely sails over the heads of the consensus of pastors coming out of seminaries, and they see in 'hardness of your heart' an authorization TO GO AHEAD AND DO. Explain this mind numbing DISCONNECT!!!
Lets examine the biblical evidence first, starting where you are in Mt 19.
Mt was written to the Jews whose custom allowed for a betrothal period. Unfaithfulness here would be fornication, not adultery Mt1:19.(Gentiles did not have betrothal so "exception" only spoken of here & in any no other place.)
Jesus uses two distinct terms for adultery and fornication in the same sentence MT19:9, it's in the greek.
ALL!! sexual unfaithfulness (incestuous too,) in marriage is ADULTERY but modern translations cant say 'except for adultery divorce is adultery,' so they cover it with 'except for sexual immorality.'
Outside of death/betrothal above, Once married - NO DIVORCE/REMARRIAGE! Can remain separated only.
Mt19:10 Disciples stunned. 'If the case be so,it is not good to marry'
11 Jesus says, 'All men cannot receive this, save to whom it is given. 12 For there are some eunuchs,.. some which were born,.. which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom. He that is able to receive it, let him.
Christian response is, well Jesus was saying you cant divorce for burnt toast, only for 'sexual sins'. That's what shell-shocked the disciples. Something not enough to shock even a godless heathen that at least holds to an ideal, if not in practice, that if you fool around y
John for JESUS wrote: CV... Do you mean on divorce? I can think of better verses that underpin the church's position on marriage. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24
No, the "One flesh" does NOT underpin the church's position. Along with 'how much God hates divorce and how much the church hates divorce,' it makes for great bible thumping sermons
Most here invoke God & the bible "against" divorce, but are clueless why! They just like the sound of it, as do those who preach it.
The church's marriage stance stands or falls on the exception clause. A tampered clause with a highly messed up interpretation that leaves preachers absurdly contradictory as they froth at the mouth and chomp at the bit to let you know that, in no uncertain terms that, they are 'absolutely against divorce and advise against it....., except when they're for it.' WELL THEN THEY'RE FOR IT!!!
J4, I doubt if any here can clearly articulate the "exception." We have NO biblical marriage
As guardians of this non-marriage, we fling at nobilities, celebrities and the gay hordes who are far off and easy targets. They can't have our non-marriages. We're against divorce ....well, when