Adultery

[Walpole]

Let's summarize this by the Bible. Jesus condemned divorce, except for fornication, which includes all illicit sexual activity outside of sex with one's spouse. It covers homosexual acts, bestiality acts, etc. as well as regular sex acts with someone not one's spouse, all of which would be considered adultery. I believe that's self-explanatory.

But Jesus didn't REQUIRE divorce for fornication. And while I don't give a blank about Hillary Clinton, she was not wrong for not divorcing Bill over the Monica affair.

I believe this sums it all up, as JESUS gave us the final word about divorce - It's wrong, except for fornication (adultery) but not REQUIRED for that reason.

Is divorce and remarriage adultery according to Jesus?

a. Yes
b. No

 

[Yeshua1]

Let's summarize this by the Bible. Jesus condemned divorce, except for fornication, which includes all illicit sexual activity outside of sex with one's spouse. It covers homosexual acts, bestiality acts, etc. as well as regular sex acts with someone not one's spouse, all of which would be considered adultery. I believe that's self-explanatory.

But Jesus didn't REQUIRE divorce for fornication. And while I don't give a blank about Hillary Clinton, she was not wrong for not divorcing Bill over the Monica affair.

I believe this sums it all up, as JESUS gave us the final word about divorce - It's wrong, except for fornication (adultery) but not REQUIRED for that reason.

God's ultimate goal would be restoration of such a relationship, but if the person committing the sexual sinning refuses to repent and forsake, the other can divorce and freed to remarry in the Lord.

 

[Walpole]

God's ultimate goal would be restoration of such a relationship, but if the person committing the sexual sinning refuses to repent and forsake, the other can divorce and freed to remarry in the Lord.

Even though Jesus explicitly says divorce and remarriage is adultery, you think a person is free to live in an adulterous relationship?


I am starting to see why the best predictor of divorce is being an Evangelical Protestant.

---> Red states, blue states, and divorce: Understanding the impact of conservative protestantism on regional variation in divorce rates | Council on Contemporary Families

 

[robycop3]

Even though Jesus explicitly says divorce and remarriage is adultery, you think a person is free to live in an adulterous relationship?


I am starting to see why the best predictor of divorce is being an Evangelical Protestant.

---> Red states, blue states, and divorce: Understanding the impact of conservative protestantism on regional variation in divorce rates | Council on Contemporary Families

Jesus said "except for fornication". He couldn't've been more clear.

Fornication by a married person is adultery, so if one divorces one's spouse for fornication, then it's for adultery, & the innocent spouse is free to remarry without sinning, same as if one's spouse had died.

 

[Walpole]

Jesus said "except for fornication". He couldn't've been more clear.

Fornication by a married person is adultery, so if one divorces one's spouse for fornication, then it's for adultery, & the innocent spouse is free to remarry without sinning, same as if one's spouse had died.

Oh you are clear. Your interpretation has Christ contradicting Himself and condoning committing adultery in order to get out of one's marriage. Your interpretation says if you want out of a marriage in order to be able to marry another, simply commit adultery and you're good to go.


---> Read this

 

[church mouse guy]

Jesus said "except for fornication". He couldn't've been more clear.

Fornication by a married person is adultery, so if one divorces one's spouse for fornication, then it's for adultery, & the innocent spouse is free to remarry without sinning, same as if one's spouse had died.

Did you ever see the famous foreign film of 50 years ago called Divorce Italian Style? There was no divorce in Italy so you had to have the better half bumped off if she didn't get you first.

 

[Yeshua1]

Oh you are clear. Your interpretation has Christ contradicting Himself and condoning committing adultery in order to get out of one's marriage. Your interpretation says if you want out of a marriage in order to be able to marry another, simply commit adultery and you're good to go.


---> Read this

Paul and Jesus both agreed that God permits divorce and remarriage in certain situations, were they both wrong?

 

[Walpole]

Paul and Jesus both agreed that God permits divorce and remarriage in certain situations, were they both wrong?

Verse(s) please.

 

[church mouse guy]

Paul and Jesus both agreed that God permits divorce and remarriage in certain situations, were they both wrong?

If a person donates enough money to the right people, one can buy an annulment of any marriage.

 

[Revmitchell]

You guys should not feed this guy. He started this thread to call people names. Let it die

 

[church mouse guy]

You guys should not feed this guy. He started this thread to call people names. Let it die

OK.

 

[JoeT]

You guys should not feed this guy. He started this thread to call people names. Let it die

Consider instead the possibility that 'truth' is the center of this thread. Where is it that God permits divorce and remarriage in 'truth'. Would rather look at an objective truth or your own subjective truth.

• Divorce is "a grave offense against the natural law", [CCC 2384], do you disagree?
• "Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society,"[CCC 23854], so you disagree?
  
• "Adultery, divorce, polygamy, and free union are grave offenses against the dignity of marriage," [CCC 2400]. do you disagree.

What about the oaths made, does not divorce dishonor both spouses, perhaps one of which unjustly? What about the vow, to "death do we part" [Cf. CCC 2384]? Is justice meaningless considering one holds for himself that he is "justified"? In the case where an injustice is made how does the biblical concept of forgiveness come into play, not once, but "till seven times; but till seventy times seven times." [Cf. Matthew 18:22]? What part does the individual's honor come to play in wholesale divorce? What about the obligations one freely takes on when he or she makes a vow of marriage, are they meaningless?

I'd suggest, the thread is about truth, honor and integrity and what part it plays in a "Christian's life", not self gratification.

JoeT

 

[Revmitchell]

The thread is about truth, honor and integrity and what part it plays in a "Christian's life", not self gratification.

JoeT

No its not. The op took a serious subject and used it to cast aspersions on anyone who does not agree with them. It has been trollish in nature

 

[JoeT]

No its not. The op took a serious subject and used it to cast aspersions on anyone who foes not agree with them. It has been trollish in nature

I disagree.

JoeT

 

[Revmitchell]

I disagree.

JoeT

It doesnt matter that you do. The many posts leveling personal attacks show otherwise.

 

[Use of Time]

What you cannot seem to answer is my question to you. Did anyone use the word "loophole"?

This is a go to tactic of yours and it is quibbling nonsense. You latch onto a word and then make it a focus of yours in a way to try and corner the posters like it is some sort of gotcha. He used the word correctly with its intended meaning. Nobody said they “called it a loophole” he said they were trying to exploit a loophole. This is a dishonest and a purposeful tactic of yours to obfuscate arguments that you are losing. It too is sick.

 

[Revmitchell]

This is a go to tactic of yours and it is quibbling nonsense. You latch onto a word and then make it a focus of yours in a way to try and corner the posters like it is some sort of gotcha. He used the word correctly with its intended meaning. Nobody said they “called it a loophole” he said they were trying to exploit a loophole. This is a dishonest and a purposeful tactic of yours to obfuscate arguments that you are losing. It too is sick.

Dont claim someone has said they hold to something if they themselves never claimed it. It is dishonest. If you font like it to bad

 

[Use of Time]

Dont claim someone has said they hold to something if they themselves never claimed it. It is dishonest. If you font like it to bad

Ooh I’ll remember you said that. If you call Dems a liar for example but they haven’t claimed it. That is dishonest? Try applying that logic. I don’t like the dishonest word games you use. And that’s me claiming it.

 

[robycop3]

Oh you are clear. Your interpretation has Christ contradicting Himself and condoning committing adultery in order to get out of one's marriage. Your interpretation says if you want out of a marriage in order to be able to marry another, simply commit adultery and you're good to go.


---> Read this

Quit acting silly; you know what I meant, that is, if my wife were to commit fornication/adultery, I'd be free to divorce her, & vice versa.

I did NOT say that if I were to commit adultery, i'd be free to divorce my wife & remarry.

I believe you knew that, & just wanted to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[JoeT]

Quit acting silly; you know what I meant, that is, if my wife were to commit fornication/adultery, I'd be free to divorce her, & vice versa.

I did NOT say that if I were to commit adultery, i'd be free to divorce my wife & remarry.

I believe you knew that, & just wanted to argue for the sake of arguing.

In the case of an adulterous spouse, what do you do about the Christian act of forgiving,
Cf. Matthew 18:22?

JoeT