Posted on 04/13/2017 7:25:35 AM PDT by ebb tide
I do not guess what Jesus would say. I live following His actual words and what Jesus did say! It is not for me to decide what He would say now. It is not for anyone else living today to decide for themselves either and tell other people what Jesus would have said. Jesus warns that any who add or take away from His words risk losing their salvation. Jesus did not discuss such things as interplanetary space flight, smart phones, nuclear weapons, abortion, plastic and cosmetic surgery. Jesus gave us a moral compass. Jesus fulfilled the laws already on the books as under the ten commandments which can be applied to all sins in one form or another. Adultery did not go away and God further doubled down by saying you should not even covet your neighbors wife let alone sleep with her. It is as simple as that and all that ignore His word and encourage sinful behavior even if clergy are equally guilty of that sin.
We are to stick with the contextual/explicit teachings and take heed that no one deceives or perverts these teachings; hence physical Churches that formed hierarchies and fundamental codes in order to protect the integrity/purpose of the teachings.
____________________________________________________
I have no qualm with this, but, who decides what the teachings are. Do you not think the Catholic seminary graduates as wise as the Methodist? Perhaps the Methodists as wise as the (you fill in the blank) church?
We all judge, which teaching is true and which one applies to me. The problem is that we all have a difference in what we believe to be correct but mind you, no matter what our belief is, what is correct is not changed, there is but one law regardless of what we or our priest/minister think about it.
I do not guess what Jesus would say. I live following His actual words and what Jesus did say!
__________________________________________________________
Wonderful and just where do you find His actual words? Jesus spoke in Aramaic. Where do you find his words?
I don’t want to be rude but what we have of the “words of Jesus” are actually the words of people who heard either the Apostles speak or heard people who heard people who heard the Apostles speak except for a few letters written by them. What we generally quote is from the Gospels which is basically what a variety of Christian reporters said they heard from people who knew or heard the Apostles. What we have of even THOSE word was translated from Aramaic into Greek and Latin and then maybe to the language you read in.
This is not a little point but a very large point. While I generally use Strong’s concordance to translate to the Greek I know of no book that goes back to the Aramaic. Very, very often using Strong’s I find that there are many translations of a particular word and they are rated in a percentage of probable veracity. Any of them could be right but the percentages are based on what most scholars believe is probably correct. I have never been a person with tons of respect for “most Scholars”. Scholars live in an isolated world and that isolation surely has an effect on how they translate.
We do not have the words of Christ but perhaps we do have the ideas as presented by Christ as translated a couple of times by people from a different time and understanding of us.
I get annoyed when people say the Holy Bible is their authority. I just think, “Yeah, right!”.
Don’t misunderstand me, I believe the Bible to be the word of God, especially The Old Testament since it still exist in the original Hebrew language. There is little or no Aramaic Biblical text that is 100% thought to be genuine. I call the Bible by the name of The Holy Bible because I believe it is Holy and contains words of Jesus Christ but I also understand the fallibility of translators. That there are contradictions in the Holy Bible does not make it less Holy, it just isn’t the perfect Word of God.
Do you not think the Catholic seminary graduates as wise as the Methodist?
Irrelevant, more like do their teachings reflect contextual, purposeful, and spiritual fundamentals of Christian morality? Does embracing homosexuality and watering down the marriage covenant reflect Christ’s teachings? Man’s ways to manipulate teachings in order to assimilate “to the times” is a dangerous road to go down into.
___________________________________________________
I would never go down this road but, my point is exactly as you express. Ministers using the same Holy Bible come up with these false doctrines of the marriage covenant and queer lifestyle and on and on. Who teaches these lies? Why it is the scholars in the Seminaries.
Semantics any way you look at it. Lawyers and Pharisees and so called professors. When I say the word of God you know that I mean scripture. I am not going to argue which translation because that is not the issue at hand. The Holy Spirit guided the early Church on which books to include and exclude. There is also the oral tradition and as others have said the Holy Roman Catholic Church in total since its founding under good Popes and Cardinals and bad has never allowed or condoned divorce as it should be and as our Lord commanded that what God had joined can not be separated. No further need to further discuss or argue, at least I will not.
Sure, and Jesus would say that God is often wrong.
Divorce was permitted for “fornication” if the husband found uncleaness in his betrothed (that is, “wife”, but before they had come together to consumate the marriage).
It was for this reason that Joseph considered putting Mary away, since she was pregnant and he knew that the child could not possibly be his, since their marriage night had not yet taken place.
After consumation of marriage, “fornication” is not the sin that takes place. The bible calls that sin “adultery”. Under these grounds the adulterous member can be put to death. Divorce is not necessary to dissolve the marriage.
After the death of the spouse, the surviving spouse is free to remarry without committing adultery.
See Romans 7:1-4.
Don't forget that thing about "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
Adultery was still a capital crime when Jesus addressed the woman caught in adultery. It would have been a misapplication of justice for him to have her stoned because the man was not also presented to him. The law, which was still in effect for such crimes (just as it was for murder and sexual deviancy), has stringent and exact requirements which requires BOTH of them to be brought forward.
I don't know how people can think that the law is somehow magically done away with. The law was never intended to save us, but to teach us about sin and make sin "exceedingly sinful" according to Paul. Paul frequently talks about sins "unto death." Adultery is one of them. Murder doesn't get a pass either, nor does sexual sin. The only parts of the law not in effect are those that deal with sacrifice and carnal ordinances which were fulfilled by Jesus. See Hebrews 9:8-10:
8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
"...until the time of the reformation", that is, until Christ has come.
Finally, constructions with "Let" require the subject in the objective case:
Let HIM, who is without sin among you, cast the first stone.
Jesus quite rightly condemned it since practically all divorces were done by powerful men to powerless women.”
The statistics also show that it is the woman that is most dissatisfied in marriage which would explain why the powerful men divorced their complaining wives, a poor man could not afford to.
I believe Jesus meant that marriage was a life long Commentment if possible, people use any excuse to divorce when the main purpose is to jump into bed with some one else or that sick disease called pride.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.