Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: ReformationFan
I like your point that Jesus mentions marriage is between a man and a woman. However, the author says, 'Jesus refers to Genesis 1 and 2 in the context of criticizing the excessive practice of husbands divorcing wives (Matthew 19:3-9). The New Testament does not say the Old Testament gives a theory of sexuality which it affirms. The New Testament interprets the Hebrew scriptures as pointing forward to the coming of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. To say Genesis provides a "framework for understanding what it means for us to be male and female before God" is already to offer interpretation well beyond what the text itself is able to authorize.' Still, I think your point holds that Jesus defined marriage as male and female. If it was something else as well then I assume that Jesus -- to be just -- would have mentioned it.

As for any sexual activity that’s not in that relationship sanctioned by God, He would have called it fornication:

“For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,” Mark 7:21

I'm wondering why fornication wouldn't apply to adultery? He mentions both adultery and fornication, but why bother mentioning both if fornication already covers for adultery as an activity not sanctioned by God?

149 posted on 10/23/2011 9:36:35 PM PDT by Blind Eye Jones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]


To: Blind Eye Jones

“I like your point that Jesus mentions marriage is between a man and a woman. However, the author says, ‘Jesus refers to Genesis 1 and 2 in the context of criticizing the excessive practice of husbands divorcing wives (Matthew 19:3-9). The New Testament does not say the Old Testament gives a theory of sexuality which it affirms. The New Testament interprets the Hebrew scriptures as pointing forward to the coming of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. To say Genesis provides a “framework for understanding what it means for us to be male and female before God” is already to offer interpretation well beyond what the text itself is able to authorize.’ Still, I think your point holds that Jesus defined marriage as male and female. If it was something else as well then I assume that Jesus — to be just — would have mentioned it.”

Thanks. Plus, I don’t see how the homosexualist argument works in light of God’s command to “be fruitful and multiply”(Gen 1:28). Also, the original hearers in Jesus’ day would have assumed marriage is male/female. Same-sex “marriage” would have been unthinkable to a first century Jewish audience.

“As for any sexual activity that’s not in that relationship sanctioned by God, He would have called it fornication:

“For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,” Mark 7:21

I’m wondering why fornication wouldn’t apply to adultery? He mentions both adultery and fornication, but why bother mentioning both if fornication already covers for adultery as an activity not sanctioned by God?”

I’m not sure. In the original Greek, the word for adulteries is moicheia which translates as adultery. The original Greek word for fornication is porneia which translates as illicit sexual intercourse, adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc., sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18, sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,12 according to this source:

http://bible.worthwhile.com/bible.php?b=mark&c=7&v=21&d=8&w=0


151 posted on 10/23/2011 11:17:21 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson