Carl Emerson
Well-Known Member
- Dec 18, 2017
- 14,734
- 10,041
- 78
- Country
- New Zealand
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
John 8 is highly contested scripture. Most Bibles have footnotes explaining this. Why would you use the most contested scripture to form a very condemning theology? And condemnation is ALWAYS risky in a NT era.
And your creating a whole new meaning out of "Put Away" for a wife is in direct conflict with scriptures AND every anthropologist that has studied the Ancient Near East.
So...
Considering the King of England who commissioned the English translation of the scriptures
And
Considering that God is Immutable
And
Stoning of adulterers
And
You don't have any real knowledge of what "Put Away" means
And
You are using highly contested scriptures as proofs of a highly doubtful theology
I'm doubting your answers for divorce and remarriage.
When Jesus was speaking about adultery men were putting away their wives and not divorcing them. Why? because when they married a wife the wife came with a dowry. The men were selfish and didn't want to give that dowry back to the woman. So they didn't divorce her. they just put here away as in sending her away. Now she wasn't divorce so if another man married her they were committing adultery because she was still married.
There was other things going on as well, but any interpretation of what Jesus said has to include this information as well.
Stephen was not stoned by followers of Christ was he?
Can you show me any scripture where Jesus does condone stoning?
And lastly Moses mandates divorce for any reason at all but Jesus reformed divorce to how it originally was intended to be which is no divorce unless a wife commits adultery.
Please provide me with one scripture that proves Jesus condoned stoning please if not then I think your just annulling scripture. He should of done or said something at least once to condone it? If not your experts think I’m dumb enough to believe them over Jesus. Nope not gonna do it. But it’s your choice. Jesus stated in John 10:34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are "gods"'?
If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came--and Scripture cannot be set aside--
You cannot set any scripture aside just because it does not suit your argument.
Jesus didn't say that someone who is being physically abused has to stay, but he clearly said that remarriage is not an option for divorced people as long as the ex still lives. And he also condemned murder. Living by his commandments is not punishment, though there is no promise that doing so is easy.If a man or woman is being abused physically, sexually or emotionally within their marriage, I'd be very leery of anyone who insisted they stay. And to further punish said person (and anyone else they meet) for leaving by insisting on a life of loneliness? It takes two people to maintain a marriage, even if at times it takes one to end it.
I'll also say that those who either reject these verses or who try an reinterpret them to say something else are no better than those who try and claim that homosexual relationships between consenting adults are good. As I try to be consistent, I condemn them both.
he clearly said that remarriage is not an option for divorced people as long as the ex still lives
I'll also say that those who either reject these verses or who try an reinterpret them to say something else are no better than those who try and claim that homosexual relationships between consenting adults are good. As I try to be consistent, I condemn them both.
Matthew 19:9 says if your partner cheats, you may be free of the marriage, and hints that you might not be committing adultery, and in every other case, you are definitely committing adultery. But Matthew 5:32 says that a man who cheats on his wife and divorces her to marry another makes her commit adultery. So I'm not 100% on that.People who have been divorced by an unbelieving partner who enters an adulterous relationship are no longer bound to the marriage.
I'll also say that those who either reject these verses or who try an reinterpret them to say something else are no better than those who try and claim that homosexual relationships between consenting adults are good. As I try to be consistent, I condemn them both.
I'm always puzzled why people are so vehement about what other couples should be doing or not doing. Perhaps we should attend to our own houses first, and let others answer to God for themselves.
Is there a way this debate can be resolved the way Jesus would?
And who taught you that was how it was to be interpreted?Adultery or fornication is also used. No difference both are sexual intercourse outside the marriage.
Hear oh Israel
The Lord
The Lord God is One.
So Jesus was just as much an author of the Old Testament as He was the New Testament.
In the Beginning was the word. The Word was God.
Verse 14 "The Word became flesh".
What I'm saying is that you cannot use a flat reading of the Matthew passage and develop a theology from it.
I admire your dedication to scripture...but that's still not getting the full meaning from it. You need to apply full hermeneutic principles in order to understand why it was translated in the manner it was and by whom.
And then become congruent with the rest of scriptures from the Old Testament and the New Testament.
Because what Jesus said was the Gospel message... Gospel means "Good News".
Nowhere in scripture is divorce and remarriage equated to blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
All sorts of sins and transgressions of men will be forgiven except for divorce and remarriage?