The role of the wife.

[gb93433]

Wisdom about life comes from living it, the longer you live it the more you know about it. Shane does not have this expereince. But he likes to pretend he does.

He is not your child, he is your brother in Christ.

No wisdom does not come with age. It comes with humility and the fear of the Lord. Many an old person has become hard, manipulative, and used of Satan. If wisdom came with just age then all young kids who come to Christ lack wisdom. Often one of the greatest problems occurs when a child wants to go on the mission field. It is not the child who is the problem it is the parents.

If one of my kids had today treated adults like shane does their daddy would have made sure they did not do it tomorrow, they would have learned better by then. But we taught our kids to repsect their elders, something shane has never been taught.

I agree with you in that he could probably use some wisdom and understanding in dealing with people. I would bet that he has learned that kind of tact from the person in the pulpit he has listened to each week. Kids tend to live out their examples and repeat what they have heard.

How about using some wisdom to help him understand how he should be rather than being criticial? Give him some encouragement to help him along the right path. You can spend your time being negative or you can help him to see that there is a better way to approach people. He may not know much about how to treat older and yoinger people. He may not have an example. We can be that example for him.

I quit my business that was doing very well to work with young people at the university. I look at working with young people as a tremendous opportunity to mold and shape their lives. It gives me the opportunity to share with them what I know and have learned. It also gives the opportunity to let them see me as an older person who lives for Christ and wants to reach people. They are the leaders of tomorrow.

It is obvious Shane is willing to engage in debate and we should commend him for that, while at the same time encourage him to give grace to others by being that way to him.

 

[Brother Bob]

I find it shameful on your part that you take a word that has "different meanings" and take advantage of that fact to try and say that Jesus Christ permitted divorce.

Though "fornication" and "adultery" have different meanings at times, I believe you said they can be substituted for one another -- how can that possibly be in this case when the two words are mentioned in the same scripture? I am not saying that these two words can not be used interchangeably elsewhere, but I know what Jesus Christ said about divorce on numerous accounts, and not ONCE did He give any grounds as to divorce.

I know you think that this scripture gives you "grounds to divorce," but if you put your Strong's dictionary into work, get a Book of Matthew history lesson, and read about the customs of the Jewish, and you'll see where this scripture is almost inapplicable to our day.

A history lesson by who. Someone who taught you? No thanks.

One, should this be pertaining to us, since fornication and adultery are used in the same scripture, demonstrating two different meanings, we would see that fornication is meaning "sex before marriage". This would be impossible for a married couple.

Two, we know that Mary and Joseph were betrothed and this was addressed in several books of the Bible. We also remember Joseph wanting to call off the engagement because he thought that Mary fornicated. We also remember Jesus telling the Pharisees that He was not conceived out of fornication (premarital sex).

Joseph thought of putting her away privily, ever what that means. It sure would not be private if Joseph cut off the engagement, now would it. I think the "putting her away" has more meaning than just breaking the engagement.

Three, if we were to say that "fornication" and "adultery" was the same thing and applied that to this scripture, then that would contradict what Jesus Christ preached about on marriage!

Greek give the same definitions for both. Fornication is used in several different cases in scripture.

Four, even if you did take the scripture in your terms, NO WHERE does it say to divorce! All it says is the man who divorces his wife for all other reasons besides fornication will be guilty of sin, her sin, etc., - it does not say TO DIVORCE because of fornication! It is letting the non-guilty party know that they will not be held accountable for the other's sins.

Well, you are reading a lot in to it, so I guess I can assume it means they are free if it was for the cause of fornication.

When you make your marriage vows before God -- no where do you mention fornication. The only way that you are free to remarry is if your husband/wife dies. No man is to put asunder what God has joined together. God even talks how he hates divorce! Jesus even spoke that there were no grounds for divorce.

Also says, whatsoever God has joined together, let not man put asunder. Can man really give a divorce, or does it take God to set them free for the cause of fornication. Mens laws can do a lot, but does that mean what is joined in Heaven, men can desolve???????

There is too much evidence in the Bible that supports Jesus would never allow divorce to go against your one scripture that is intended for the Jewish for the customs of betrothal, which makes absolutely perfect sense. Remember, Matthew was written about the generation of Jesus Christ.

He was teaching His Apostles the "new" and living way.

When you draw conclusions about the Bible and have only one scripture, it is best to go throughout the Bible to see if you have anything to back your point up with. Those of you that advocate divorce -- have nothing. You have nothing except a scripture for the Jews.

You make up the part "for the Jews".

It is amazing to me how you sleep well at night!

You need to sit under someone like me for a while, then we see how you sleep at night.

I just showed you that they are interchangeable of which you said they were not. My problem with you is that you will not accept them even in the definition that Jesus used them.

Mat 5:32But 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.

It is there, you can't get around it, so live with it. The permission does not belong to you, it belongs to Jesus, quit trying to take it away from Him.

The following is who He was teaching "saving the cause of fornication" too.

Mat 5:1¶And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:

Mat 5:2And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,

They already knew the Jewish custom, this was the "new" and living way of Christ.

BTW; I do not sleep well at night, but its because of getting old and pain from heart surgeries.


BBob,

 

[gb93433]

Knowledge is one thing - wisdom is another. Kindness and grace is yet another and I'd say goes along with wisdom. Brother Shane lacks grace and wisdom since he has spoken harshly towards women (he said that I was not a lady since I wear shorts and said some other pretty rude things that would have gotten him a speaking to by my husband if we met face to face), and has spoken down to his elders. I'm sure Hudson Taylor and Billy Graham spoke with more grace and respect than Brother Shane does.

I would tend to agree with you. An entire ship can be turned with a rudder. How can we be that rudder to him is the question?

We can be challenged to help him know the grace of God or we can be harsh and he will probably walk away hard. We can help him to be gracious or harsh to others.

We love because He first loved us.

 

[Brother Shane]

Joseph thought of putting her away privily, ever what that means. It sure would not be private if Joseph cut off the engagement, now would it. I think the "putting her away" has more meaning than just breaking the engagement.

Are you saying that he could not privily break off the engagement? I understand this as letting everything go. He would move on because he discovered fornication on her part, and they both would be free to marry whoever they choose because they did not speak the marriage covenant. They were not going to divorce each other from marriage. He would be free of all (as the scripture says), but she will be guilty of fornication. As we know, this was not the case.

Greek give the same definitions for both. Fornication is used in several different cases in scripture.

That is it. And in this case, it is used as premarital sex. Adultery is used as sex between a married person and someone else. I do not see where you think I'm going wrong. I am using the definitions given for those words. In order to figure out which definitions to use, you need to compare if it makes sense or not. An idiot could tell you that fornication and adultery are two different terms in this scripture, hence Jesus used both of them. They weren't there to take up place, Brother. He did not use two words to mean the same thing.

Well, you are reading a lot in to it, so I guess I can assume it means they are free if it was for the cause of fornication.

What I'm saying is that no where did Jesus permit divorce, yet advised that the man would not be held accountable for the woman's sin of fornication while they were engaged.

Also says, whatsoever God has joined together, let not man put asunder. Can man really give a divorce, or does it take God to set them free for the cause of fornication. Mens laws can do a lot, but does that mean what is joined in Heaven, men can desolve???????

I do not believe in divorce, so you're asking the wrong person. End of that.

He was teaching His Apostles the "new" and living way.

I promise you that it did not include an exception to divorce. If it did, show me.

You make up the part "for the Jews".

Are you seriously telling me you do not think that Matthew was influenced by the Jewish?

You need to sit under someone like me for a while, then we see how you sleep at night.

If you brought up the topic of divorce I'm afraid I would rebuke you by every scripture that speaks against it possible. I will not have someone spread false imformation about our Saviour in His House! Then again, I would never sit under you.

I just showed you that they are interchangeable of which you said they were not. My problem with you is that you will not accept them even in the definition that Jesus used them.

You showed me that they could be interchanged, but you did not show me how the two words can interchange themselves when they are used both in the same scripture. Get this through your head: I'm not worried about the other scriptures now. We're focusing on the one in Matthew, and you need to examine the other definitions of fornication and adultery. You're having a hard time coming to acceptance that maybe what you have advised all your life was one of the biggest misconceptions of the Bible to date!

It is there, you can't get around it, so live with it. The permission does not belong to you, it belongs to Jesus, quit trying to take it away from Him.

I speak the same to you.

 

[Brother Bob]

Are you saying that he could not privily break off the engagement? I understand this as letting everything go. He would move on because he discovered fornication on her part, and they both would be free to marry whoever they choose because they did not speak the marriage covenant. They were not going to divorce each other from marriage. He would be free of all (as the scripture says), but she will be guilty of fornication. As we know, this was not the case.

Mat 1:18 ¶ Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:




That is it. And in this case, it is used as premarital sex. Adultery is used as sex between a married person and someone else. I do not see where you think I'm going wrong. I am using the definitions given for those words. In order to figure out which definitions to use, you need to compare if it makes sense or not. An idiot could tell you that fornication and adultery are two different terms in this scripture, hence Jesus used both of them. They weren't there to take up place, Brother. He did not use two words to mean the same thing.

Mat 5:32But 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

How on earth could it be "premartial sex" in this case???/



What I'm saying is that no where did Jesus permit divorce, yet advised that the man would not be held accountable for the woman's sin of fornication while they were engaged.

No, He said if any man put away his wife for any cause saving the cause of fornication, it would not be legal, but in the cause of fornication it was legal and he was free.



I do not believe in divorce, so you're asking the wrong person. End of that.



I promise you that it did not include an exception to divorce. If it did, show me.


Mat 5:32But 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.




Are you seriously telling me you do not think that Matthew was influenced by the Jewish?

I am telling you I do not think anyone influenced the word of God. Apparently you think the Jews did.




If you brought up the topic of divorce I'm afraid I would rebuke you by every scripture that speaks against it possible. I will not have someone spread false imformation about our Saviour in His House! Then again, I would never sit under you.

You would sit and keep your mouth shut, or I would have you removed from the building.



You showed me that they could be interchanged, but you did not show me how the two words can interchange themselves when they are used both in the same scripture. Get this through your head: I'm not worried about the other scriptures now. We're focusing on the one in Matthew, and you need to examine the other definitions of fornication and adultery. You're having a hard time coming to acceptance that maybe what you have advised all your life was one of the biggest misconceptions of the Bible to date!

That puts me and Jesus in the same boat!
Mat 5:32But 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





I speak the same to you.



[/font]

At least you had to admit that the two are interchangeable, even if you will not give Jesus the courtesy to give His own laws.

Make it easy for both of us, is the following scripture also a Jewish custom??

Mat 5:28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.


BBob,

 

[EdSutton]

Do you not believe that true repentance is the essential in going to Heaven?

Before I answer this, let me ask a question. Were I an unsaved individual and asked you what is necessary for salvation, or 'how' one is saved, what would you tell me? Let's ask those two questions:

1.) "What must I do to be saved?" Or what is necessary for one to have eternal life?

Answer: _________________________________________________

(Take as much space as you need. This is just happens to be the width my screen will allow me to print.)

2,) 'How' are we saved? In other words, by what 'method' or 'agency'?

Answer: _________________________________________________

(Same as above. Take as much space as you need.)

I'll await your response, so that we are not comparing apples and pickles.

Blessings,

Ed

 

[annsni]

I find it shameful on your part that you take a word that has "different meanings" and take advantage of that fact to try and say that Jesus Christ permitted divorce.

It's not shameful because it's the truth whether you accept it or not.

Though "fornication" and "adultery" have different meanings at times, I believe you said they can be substituted for one another -- how can that possibly be in this case when the two words are mentioned in the same scripture? I am not saying that these two words can not be used interchangeably elsewhere, but I know what Jesus Christ said about divorce on numerous accounts, and not ONCE did He give any grounds as to divorce.

Because fornication can cover a number of sexual sins - I'd say pretty much all of them. Adultery is specific to the marriage relationship and is giving a specific idea here. Divorcing someone does not cause them to commit fornication with someone else if they remarry so in this case, fornication cannot be used as the second term.

I know you think that this scripture gives you "grounds to divorce," but if you put your Strong's dictionary into work, get a Book of Matthew history lesson, and read about the customs of the Jewish, and you'll see where this scripture is almost inapplicable to our day.

I take my information from my Bible and the clear teaching of Scripture. I do not need "customs" to tell me the "code" to understand what Jesus was saying. He said what He said. That settles it.

One, should this be pertaining to us, since fornication and adultery are used in the same scripture, demonstrating two different meanings, we would see that fornication is meaning "sex before marriage". This would be impossible for a married couple.

No - fornication does not just mean sex before marriage. It also includes all other forms of sexual sin from pornography to bestiality to homosexuality.

Two, we know that Mary and Joseph were betrothed and this was addressed in several books of the Bible. We also remember Joseph wanting to call off the engagement because he thought that Mary fornicated. We also remember Jesus telling the Pharisees that He was not conceived out of fornication (premarital sex).

Fornication does not mean premarital sex although the term covers it too. Just as "fast food" can mean pizza or a Big Mac, fornication is not specific to a particular act.

Three, if we were to say that "fornication" and "adultery" was the same thing and applied that to this scripture, then that would contradict what Jesus Christ preached about on marriage!

Since Scripture is clear, it is you who are contradicting the teachings on Christ.

Four, even if you did take the scripture in your terms, NO WHERE does it say to divorce! All it says is the man who divorces his wife for all other reasons besides fornication will be guilty of sin, her sin, etc., - it does not say TO DIVORCE because of fornication! It is letting the non-guilty party know that they will not be held accountable for the other's sins.

Exactly!

When you make your marriage vows before God -- no where do you mention fornication. The only way that you are free to remarry is if your husband/wife dies. No man is to put asunder what God has joined together. God even talks how he hates divorce! Jesus even spoke that there were no grounds for divorce.

Yes - God hates divorce but He did give us a way out in the case of infidelity. Jesus did give us grounds for divorce. Fornication - sexual immorality.

There is too much evidence in the Bible that supports Jesus would never allow divorce to go against your one scripture that is intended for the Jewish for the customs of betrothal, which makes absolutely perfect sense. Remember, Matthew was written about the generation of Jesus Christ.

Matthew was written by God not just for one generation or one people. It was written as God's Word to His people. It is valid for all of us today.

When you draw conclusions about the Bible and have only one scripture, it is best to go throughout the Bible to see if you have anything to back your point up with. Those of you that advocate divorce -- have nothing. You have nothing except a scripture for the Jews.

If God forbid divorce, then He would not have put it in the law. God does not contradict himself. Then Jesus later told us that unless there is sexual immorality/fornication, we cannot divorce because marriage is so important.

It is amazing to me how you sleep well at night!

Eh - Sleeping has nothing to do with this. But I know I have complete peace in this situation and have seen marriages break and stay together through marital infidelity.

I do pray, Shane, that you will marry a woman who will be all that you think she should be. But understand that you marry a woman who is still sinful and you should pray for her relationship with the Lord daily. Saying that any of us are above a sin is pretty cocky IMO and it's important to realize that it's not easy to be married. As wonderful as marriage is, even if you marry the "perfect" person, they will not BE perfect. They will have faults and annoyances. If you keep them in perspective, all will be fine. But when you begin to think "Man, if my wife would only...." it's a great way for Satan to step in. I know at 17, you say "never" but never say never Shane. I've found when you say "never", you just might get kicked in the head.

 

[EdSutton]

To answer your question having internet is paid for by my job plus I have it here at work and we are free to be on it when we do not have patients. Spare time is when I get home at night and everything is cleaned up and kids in bed I might get an hour to myself if I dont have a project I am working on at home for work. Yeah I work 40 hrs a week and my paychecks dont cover all the bills. Welcome to the real world Shane I pray you will get into it soon enough and then you will know.

It is none of his business how your internet is paid for and neither is it mine. Live your life the best you know how, no one else is there providing these services for you. God Bless,

BBob,

I gotta' agree with Brother Bob on this one. That is too much information dispensed out to people who do not need to know, and some may have malicious motives (not that I think any here do, but that does not mean someone else might not 'hack-in' and figure something out), and is no one else's business, unless it is an employer's business, and is contrary to the policy.

Protect yourself, when doing so is easy, such as here.

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

It's not shameful because it's the truth whether you accept it or not.



Because fornication can cover a number of sexual sins - I'd say pretty much all of them. Adultery is specific to the marriage relationship and is giving a specific idea here. Divorcing someone does not cause them to commit fornication with someone else if they remarry so in this case, fornication cannot be used as the second term.



I take my information from my Bible and the clear teaching of Scripture. I do not need "customs" to tell me the "code" to understand what Jesus was saying. He said what He said. That settles it.



No - fornication does not just mean sex before marriage. It also includes all other forms of sexual sin from pornography to bestiality to homosexuality.



Fornication does not mean premarital sex although the term covers it too. Just as "fast food" can mean pizza or a Big Mac, fornication is not specific to a particular act.



Since Scripture is clear, it is you who are contradicting the teachings on Christ.

Four, even if you did take the scripture in your terms, NO WHERE does it say to divorce! All it says is the man who divorces his wife for all other reasons besides fornication will be guilty of sin, her sin, etc., - it does not say TO DIVORCE because of fornication! It is letting the non-guilty party know that they will not be held accountable for the other's sins.

Exactly!



Yes - God hates divorce but He did give us a way out in the case of infidelity. Jesus did give us grounds for divorce. Fornication - sexual immorality.



Matthew was written by God not just for one generation or one people. It was written as God's Word to His people. It is valid for all of us today.



If God forbid divorce, then He would not have put it in the law. God does not contradict himself. Then Jesus later told us that unless there is sexual immorality/fornication, we cannot divorce because marriage is so important.



Eh - Sleeping has nothing to do with this. But I know I have complete peace in this situation and have seen marriages break and stay together through marital infidelity.

I do pray, Shane, that you will marry a woman who will be all that you think she should be. But understand that you marry a woman who is still sinful and you should pray for her relationship with the Lord daily. Saying that any of us are above a sin is pretty cocky IMO and it's important to realize that it's not easy to be married. As wonderful as marriage is, even if you marry the "perfect" person, they will not BE perfect. They will have faults and annoyances. If you keep them in perspective, all will be fine. But when you begin to think "Man, if my wife would only...." it's a great way for Satan to step in. I know at 17, you say "never" but never say never Shane. I've found when you say "never", you just might get kicked in the head.

Let me amen this and say thanks for the post, it seems to be right on line with the Lord's teachings.

BBob,

 

[nunatak]

Before I answer this, let me ask a question. Were I an unsaved individual and asked you what is necessary for salvation, or 'how' one is saved, what would you tell me? Let's ask those two questions:

1.) "What must I do to be saved?" Or what is necessary for one to have eternal life?

Answer: _________________________________________________

(Take as much space as you need. This is just happens to be the width my screen will allow me to print.)

2,) 'How' are we saved? In other words, by what 'method' or 'agency'?

Answer: _________________________________________________

(Same as above. Take as much space as you need.)

I'll await your response, so that we are not comparing apples and pickles.

Blessings,

Ed

Ed, would you please start a new thread with this. I am interested in seeing this discussed (keep in mind I am still new in my faith.)

 

[Brother Shane]

Replying to Brother Bob

Mat 1:18 ¶ Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

You're correct in bolding that last line. They were espoused (see first 18), or in other words, betrothed, and were referred to as husband and wife. That was already pointed out earlier.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Mat&chapter=5&verse=32&version=kjv#32

Mat 5:32But 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

How on earth could it be "premarital sex" in this case???

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Mat&chapter=5&verse=32&version=kjv#32http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Mat&chapter=5&verse=32&version=kjv#32http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Mat&chapter=5&verse=32&version=kjv#32

You will never see it under the circumstances of "premarital sex" until you realize that the "saving for the cause of fornication" was referring to the Jews, similar to the situation of Mary and Joseph. You can not try to see that it would be considered "premarital sex" until you understand that 1) fornication in this scripture IS referring to premarital sex and 2) the line in the scripture "saving for the cause of fornication" was referring to the betrothed couples.

No, He said if any man put away his wife for any cause saving the cause of fornication, it would not be legal, but in the cause of fornication it was legal and he was free.

Then how come when Jesus was asked by the Pharisees if it was lawful to put away His wife, He said what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder? How come your little "exception" was not included there or any other place Jesus mentioned divorce?

I am telling you I do not think anyone influenced the word of God. Apparently you think the Jews did.

I think think that line was referring to a custom the Jews practiced.

Make it easy for both of us, is the following scripture also a Jewish custom??

Mat 5:28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Is "fornication" and "adultery" used twice in that same scripture signifying two different meanings? Make it easier for yourself.

 

[Brother Shane]

Replying to Ann

It's not shameful because it's the truth whether you accept it or not.

I will not accept it because you have NO SCRIPTURE REFERENCE to back it up.

Because fornication can cover a number of sexual sins - I'd say pretty much all of them. Adultery is specific to the marriage relationship and is giving a specific idea here. Divorcing someone does not cause them to commit fornication with someone else if they remarry so in this case, fornication cannot be used as the second term.

Fornication, in the Bible, has been almost ALWAYS referred to as premarital sex. You want to lump everything into "fornication" and set aside adultery for "during marriage sex" just to find an excuse to allow divorce. I have news for you -- Galatians 5:19-21 seems to set aside those subjects you lump into fornication. Adultery is giving a specific here, and so is fornication!

If Jesus wanted FORNICATION and ADULTERY to mean the same thing in this verse -- HE WOULD HAVE HAD IT SO.

I take my information from my Bible and the clear teaching of Scripture. I do not need "customs" to tell me the "code" to understand what Jesus was saying. He said what He said. That settles it.

No you don't -- you take one scripture to justify something sinful. Jesus never said it -- you took what He said out of context. You're right -- He did say what He said -- and He meant it too!

No - fornication does not just mean sex before marriage. It also includes all other forms of sexual sin from pornography to bestiality to homosexuality.

Galatians 5:19-21 seems to break those up into terms by themselves -- including fornication and homosexuality and adultery separately!

Fornication does not mean premarital sex although the term covers it too. Just as "fast food" can mean pizza or a Big Mac, fornication is not specific to a particular act.

Yet, when it comes to an issue that will step on your toes, you want to make it mean what you want it to mean to justify a sin. Thankfully, Jesus addresses divorce elsewhere and shot this theory down! Praise God!

Since Scripture is clear, it is you who are contradicting the teachings on Christ.

Sister Ann -- your little theory on divorce contradicts Jesus' words when asked about divorce! I do not think I am the one in violation of such!

Yes - God hates divorce but He did give us a way out in the case of infidelity. Jesus did give us grounds for divorce. Fornication - sexual immorality.

UnBiblical.

If God forbid divorce, then He would not have put it in the law. God does not contradict himself. Then Jesus later told us that unless there is sexual immorality/fornication, we cannot divorce because marriage is so important.

Oh really? Since when did God put divorce in the law? And since marriage is so important -- why would "sexual immorality" give grounds for divorce? Why not being an unbeliever? Why not being with a murderer?

Eh - Sleeping has nothing to do with this. But I know I have complete peace in this situation and have seen marriages break and stay together through marital infidelity.

Yeah - and I have seen marriages break just because they quit loving each other. Your point?!

 

[nodak]

Bro. Shane:

1. Jesus did allow for divorce in the case of adultery. Get a concordance and learn to use it.

2. People have been very tolerant of your attitude here, but I am truly concerned. You speak (write) very disrespectfully of folks if they disagree with your interpretation of the Bible, and you speak as though you have accumulated wisdom even though you lack basic life experience. The unsaved also read these forums. Please treat us as brothers and sisters in Christ rather than as idiots who are your enemies.

My apologies to mods for speaking out if it is considered inappropriate.

 

[Brother Bob]

Replying to Brother Bob



You're correct in bolding that last line. They were espoused (see first 18), or in other words, betrothed, and were referred to as husband and wife. That was already pointed out earlier.

Yes, but according to scripture and the angel, he took her as his wife before Jesus was born. He "knew" her not, until after Jesus was born.



You will never see it under the circumstances of "premarital sex" until you realize that the "saving for the cause of fornication" was referring to the Jews, similar to the situation of Mary and Joseph. You can not try to see that it would be considered "premarital sex" until you understand that 1) fornication in this scripture IS referring to premarital sex and 2) the line in the scripture "saving for the cause of fornication" was referring to the betrothed couples.

You need to get the "Greek" definition of fornication and see that it also covers adultery. This couple was married, yet Jesus used the term of fornication in the first part for the same couple and adultery later for the same couple.



Then how come when Jesus was asked by the Pharisees if it was lawful to put away His wife, He said what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder? How come your little "exception" was not included there or any other place Jesus mentioned divorce?

We are discussing where Jesus did put it for our learning. You will have to ask Him why its not elsewhere. But if all Jesus had said and done had of been written, I suppose the world would not contain the books.



I think think that line was referring to a custom the Jews practiced.

Well, we could get thousands of "thinks", I suppose.



Is "fornication" and "adultery" used twice in that same scripture signifying two different meanings? Make it easier for yourself.

I explain that Jesus used the two different words, for the selfsame people, if the translators got it correct. Also, if fornication is for premartial sex, how come Jesus used it for a married person???

BBob,
....................

 

[Brother Shane]

Bro. Shane:

1. Jesus did allow for divorce in the case of adultery. Get a concordance and learn to use it.

Learn how to give me scripture and you use it in context and maybe we can be on common ground.

2. People have been very tolerant of your attitude here, but I am truly concerned.

First off, what kind of attitude are you portraying in your above post... "learn how to use it?" To me, it sounds like your attitude is the one that has went sour, ma'am.

Second, why don't you try reading Matthew 7:1-5 and loose your poor attitude before you even SUGGEST someone change theirs! The Bible would call you a hypocrite for your last action!

 

[Brother Shane]

....................

Give me scripture.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Why do you all argue with a teenager?

 

[Brother Shane]

Why do you bring up my age? I sometimes wonder if we happened to be in agreeance, if my age would have ever been brought up?

 

[donnA]

Why do you all argue with a teenager?

After having raised 2 boys through teenage years, I have to agree Roger.

 

[Brother Bob]

Give me scripture.

Give me scripture that Matt is only addressing Jewish customs???

Give me scripture on anything.

BBob,