Jesus on divorce.

Author: Mall
Jesus
Divorce

Posts

Total: 76
#31
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,322
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mall
Well when Jesus speaks on divorce, like a well seasoned politician he doesn't actually answer the question direct.
In fact, the Gospels on a few occasions show Jesus to be a master at the non answer.

But generally, it appears that both god and Jesus were against divorce.


#32
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mall
Did Jesus approve of divorce between man + woman that otherwise result in adultery?
What an interesting question.  

Jesus doesn't like divorce for the sake of divorce. 

Yet he didn't resist it if it was necessary. 

In his time, many people were divorcing because they didn't want to be with their spouses anymore. It was mainly male driven of course. And mostly occurred out of lust. Or disappointment. 

Adultery is a legitimate reason to divorce your spouse.  Of course, it didn't make it mandatory. But it made it legitimate. 

There were of course other reasons that made divorce legitimate. Jesus didn't need to mention everyone since the covenant was part of the Jewish system. 

Any offence which breached the covenant was a legitimate reason to divorce.  One was called death. Death breached the covenant and therefore brought an end to the marriage.  People after their spouse died could if they wished go and marry someone else. 

Adultery was one of these reasons that breached the covenant. Another was battery. If a husband was beating his wife or vice versa. That was a legitimate reason to seek a divorce.   Today, we might call that domestic violence.  Another perfectly acceptable reason was "abandonment". If a husband left his wife and went to live elsewhere, then the covenant was breached. She could divorce him.  

Divorce was only legitimate if the marriage covenant had been breached.  And then the couple needed to decide if the breach warranted divorce or could be resolved. 




#33
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,322
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mall
Tradesecret wrote:@Mall
Adultery is a legitimate reason to divorce your spouse.

While King David (Son of God) had multiple wives and concubines.

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

Hebrews 13:4 - "Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."
Matthew 5:27-28 - "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery."
Luke 16:18 - "Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from [her] husband committeth adultery."
Matthew 19:9 - "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery."

Seems to be a case of - do as I say not what I do.😂

Topic's author
#34
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 336
Posts: 866
3
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
3
4
4
-->
@Stephen
That's right Jesus never approved of what his father hates .
Topic's author
#35
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 336
Posts: 866
3
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
3
4
4
-->
@Tradesecret
Romans 7:2.
"For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. "

Now how does divorce fit into this without conflicting with Jesus?
#36
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mall
Romans 7:2.
"For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. "

Now how does divorce fit into this without conflicting with Jesus?

Adultery is a legitimate reason to divorce your spouse.  It's not the only outcome of adultery, but it is a legitimate outcome.

And people don't have to divorce but if they did it would be legitimate. 

To understand the principles relating to divorce, you need to understand what a covenant is.   Marriage is a covenant. Notice, it is not a contract. Covenants and Contracts are similar but not the same thing.  Both can be breached. And breaches have consequences. Adultery is a breach of the Marriage covenant. Committing adultery is damaging to the very core of the covenant. It is unfaithfulness, not just to the other party, but to the covenant itself. People enter contracts to improve the individual's interests.  People enter covenants, for the good of the covenant. When people get married, two become one. This is not just a sexual thing, it is a legal thing. Each individual dies to themselves and they both become legally one person. This is still reflected in the law. 

So if an individual decides to be unfaithful to the covenant, they in effect are choosing to kill the covenant as one new person. Hence, since the breach is so fundamental, it is legitimately at an end.  This is why adultery is a legitimate reason for divorce.  Romans 7:2 takes up the same idea.  When people trust Jesus, they die in Christ at the cross. Their old man dies as it were.  And when Christ was raised, then these people are raised as well. Their old man is dead. 

If they did not die with Christ, then the law remains over them. They would be subject to the consequences of breaking every law. But since they have died, in Christ, then they are no longer subject to the consequences of sin.  This is not talking about consequences here and now in the temporary life but in the eternals. Hence, if I commit adultery here, I can still face the consequences of my sin. Yet, in the Eternals, these consequences are no longer are a problem for me. 

SO hopefully, this makes sense to you. And perhaps it doesn't it. After all, it does take spiritual discernment. 
Topic's author
#37
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 336
Posts: 866
3
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
3
4
4
-->
@Tradesecret
Romans 7 doesn't justify divorce. You can't read that anywhere in the passage and Jesus never did either.

As the late Bishop E.W. Tookes would say " don't run to 1 Thessalonians 1:10 thinking you have something".  Don't run to Matthew thinking you have something.
#38
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mall
Romans 7 doesn't justify divorce. You can't read that anywhere in the passage and Jesus never did either.
I'm pretty sure I wasn't using Romans 7 to justify divorce.  I was using Romans as an illustration of what a covenant is and how one ends.  Paul in that passage uses marriage as an illustration of covenant and of the the law in relation to it. 

I didn't even go as far as he did.  For him adultery was a breaking of the law. But he also indicated that when people died in Christ, they died to the law. So the law had no hold over them. Therefore, whereas under the OT, people could be put to death for adultery if you were a Jew. But now the law did not apply in the same way, they were free in Christ. 

Not to sin, but to be free in Christ. Although the passage may not justify divorce, it certainly doesn't forbid it either.  It provides certainty that for those in Christ, whether they be Jews or Gentiles, the  law had no hold over them. They were not obligated towards it.  So the original poster is partially correct. These matters were nailed to the cross for those who are in Christ Jesus. 

Everyone else has no freedom to divorce since they live under the law. 
#39
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Divorce. 
Divorce.
Divorce. 
There ya go.   
I said that three mutha fucking times in a row right? 
Ya'll  seen it hey ? 
You witnessed it right ? 
So thats  Three ( Divorces ) 

One.  Divorce.
Two .  Divorce. 
And three. 
Divorce. 

Now As long as one of you guys witnessed my "legally"  bloody ummmm binding , bonded figgen divorce settlement , statement that i just stated. 
That being the divorce word said three times. 
Im fucking good to go. 

Females however must jump through hoops if they've a chance a getting a divorce. 

But um yeah. 
It was Men that made up allllllll this religious nonsense  so fuck em. 

Ya wouldn't go to GREAT LENGTHS to make shit up on a scale like this  and it be, 
Not very benificial. 
Not Benificial airy. 
You know what i mean. 



NOTE. 
We wanna make things easy and benificial ,benificial  airy for man hey ? 
Thats all. 

' Starts making monkey noise '.
OH. 
 
AR.
Join in men. 

'O'  


#40
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
HOWEVER.  
If man didn't have that ummm " ability " or " luxury " if you will . 
That being the .
Divorce. 
Divorce.  
Divorce. 
Leagal official document.  
The contrat thingy .


Women might be killed. 
You know. , like at a greater number. 

I've seen crime shows where men do do that.  
Like , they are having an affair and they want to leave there wifie. 
Sooooo ,
bllllllaaaatttt.
Or like , chop chop. 
Or a dear little Strangle.
You fucking know. 
Men are cunts right ? 
RIGHT? 

Correct. 


Good game.
Good game. 
#41
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
What We really should of had God do wasssssss. 
Write down a name.
Example 
(  Frederick  )   

and then follow that up with,  a couple of numbers.

Example 
(  39  :  76. ) 

So it looks like this .

Fredrick 39 : 76
Thennnnnn write a half silly worded ummm, statement like. 
Example.  And the wife shall taketh nothing awayeth from the man,  in separation of marriage.  

Becauseeeeeeeeee. 

When you see this ummmm. 
Name ,
Followed by two sets of nunbers "setup " in one of the books that the god did, that means its GOD saying that. 
Yeah . 
Well i think thats how it works.  
So um yeah. 

The sentence after,    The name followed by the numbers parts  , IS LIKE WHAT GOD IS SAYING.

I SHIT YOU NOT FELLAS.  

What im trying to say is .
The bible dudes that did the bible could of like ummm, put words in gods mouth.  . 
And Words that  not even really come from the god. 

They could of just went like.
Matthew
then followed up with some bogus numbers )  
Then wrote something , thussssss making it loook like god was saying it. 

You know what im saying hey ? 
Like.
They could of liked made stuff up.  

Wowzers. 
Thats Scary hey ? 





Topic's author
#42
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 336
Posts: 866
3
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
3
4
4
-->
@Tradesecret
You're saying all these statements but you have no scripture that states divorce is justified. You're just giving commentary of an idea. 

Notice that. I'm giving all this scripture that denies divorce. Just straight from the words of the book,not my own.
#43
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,322
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mall
Mall, wrote @Tradesecret
You're saying all these statements but you have no scripture that states divorce is justified. You're just giving commentary of an idea. 
Opinion based on nothing at all biblical is The Reverend Tradesecret's usual mo.


Notice that. I'm giving all this scripture that denies divorce. Just straight from the words of the book, not my own.

Indeed. In fact the Reverend Tradesecret will always insist on members providing "biblical evidence/ proof" for their comments, statements, theories, ideas and opinions while affording himself guess-work, conjecture, opinion. speculation and his beliefs and presenting them as fact. While not affording you the same curtesy. He's a proven compulsive liar and a  fkn fraud that makes it all up on the hoof.
 You'll get used to in if you stick around long enough, Mall. He's frightened to death to discuss any of the gospels or the bible in general even though he tells us that he has;
"been taught to memorise the bible from and early age in ancient Greek and Hebrew languages" too.

It's his "definitions" default when he's in one of the many tight corners that he often paints himself into that makes me laugh out loud. He tells us that he doesn't accept definitions from "some dictionary". 😒

#44
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,275
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mall
Marriage and divorce are latter day data constructs, relative to daft ideas.

Fuck all to do with Universal creation theory.

Scripture is daft ideas relative to stuff that happened somewhere, over the last 2000 or so years.

Fuck the previous 20 billion.
#45
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,275
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
They could have liked made stuff up.

Now, why didn't I think of that Deb?
#46
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mall
ou're saying all these statements but you have no scripture that states divorce is justified. You're just giving commentary of an idea. 

Notice that. I'm giving all this scripture that denies divorce. Just straight from the words of the book,not my own.
I don't have to cite a verse in order to demonstrate that these are Scriptural ideas.

Perhaps for people who are not Christians, it makes sense to quote verses, but people who have grown up in the church, know and understand what is biblical or not. 

The idea of Covenant is an OT idea. It is there on almost every page of the bible. I could quote verses from Adam, from Noah, from Abraham who all understood and practiced covenant theology.  I could take you through the entire idea of how it worked with the law and how breaching it caused them to be put to death covenantally. 

But the fact is, you don't really want to know these things. You just want to make a point. A point that supports your pre-conceived view. 

If I thought you desired to know the truth, then, I would take more time to articulate it. But the fact is - you have access to databases as well as I do. 

There is another problem with simply quoting a verse. It tends to be a verse that is taken out of context and used to say what it never was meant to say. It's the MO of others on this site to do so.  If it ever got to the point when people ACTUALLY wanted to discuss, rather than TELL, then perhaps it might be worth doing so. But some people on this site, have their own agendas, and won't listen to anyone else. Perhaps I am one of them. Who knows. 




Topic's author
#47
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 336
Posts: 866
3
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
3
4
4
-->
@Tradesecret
I'm glad you agree with my point that these are scriptural ideas . 

Which are different from scriptural teaching, scriptural approval and condemnation.

If I ask show me in the scriptures where divorce is approved by Jesus , you either can show it or you can't. I can show you in scripture where it says it's something God hates.

That and Romans 7 all conflict with that. But in regards to what you think, your personal belief on it, you can believe divorce is justified now, apparently to what you learned in or from a false church assembly I guess.

Not in scripture , oh no.
Topic's author
#48
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 336
Posts: 866
3
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
3
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Did Jesus approve of divorce?
#49
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,275
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mall
It's not important Mall.
#50
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,322
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
The bible dudes that did the bible could of like ummm, put words in gods mouth.  .

And Words that  not even really come from the god.

 They could of liked made stuff up.  


Absolutely correct, Deb.  As do the Pastors, Priests and Chaplains. Any explanations for those awkward, embarrassing, ambiguous and  contradictory verses are all made up on the hoof and trying to come across to the reader as intelligent and knowledgeable, at which the Pastors and Chaplains fail miserably.
Hence the total lack of BIBLICAL support for said explanations..
#51
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,322
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mall
Tradesecret @Mall: I could quote verses from Adam, from Noah, from Abraham who all understood and practiced covenant theology.  

                                This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^from the man that tells us that he:
"doesn't even believe in religion and that it should be banned" and that "words are just words" and  "the (words of the} BIBLE can't do anything". 
The man is a fkn joke! and very entertaining,😂
#52
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
It feels like jesus has never ever talked to a girl before.

A definite,  " bros before hoes kind of guy "  

The chicks dig him and the guys love him. 
But never ever never did he say boo to a chick. 
Butttttt, we know very little of 15 year old to 25  year old jesus. 
Be was just a Fisherman and a carpenter. 
Thats all. He ever did. 
He fished and he capented.
I mean carpendry. 
He built shit and fished.
Woodworking and fishing. 
THATS ALL HE DID. 

He probably never sinned.  
Thats like Never did one of the "sin"  things you.
No sinning.
Hes just a friggen top guy all round.   

Fuck where was i going with that. ? 
ANYWAY. 

Jesus must of been ACE .
Yeah , yeah . 

Butttttttttt, he is dead right. ? 

He is dead right ? 

Im dead right. ? 

He is dead hey? 

Guys. 
He is dead ? 

Fuckin say it. 
Type it up.  Say yes , he is dead . 
Dead as in ..... he done died .
He Dieded .

Correct. 

He never did none of this ,  divorcing  thing you guys speak of. 
In fact. He would distence himself from shit like that hey ? 

Yeah , yeah 
Fucking good guy was the jesus.  

Jesus ain't god. 
Thats a whole different post.  
Atheists know jesus aint god.,

Look dont you start me boy. 
He aint. 


Or is he. ?



Sooooooo stay tuned for the next posting in ye religion forum . 
For it is here were we ask the BIG QUESTIONS. 
THE HEAVY QUESTIONS. 
and 
WHERE EVERYONE IS RIGHTTTTTTT.  



Wankers.


Good game. 
Good game. 
  
#53
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Jesus on divorce? 
Ummm No. 
Jesus on his angling skills. 
Yes. 
Jesus talking us threw dove tail joints . 
Also yes. 
But he aint ever kissed a chick before so realy , he dont know shit, 

Ok now the spirits are saying .
Meek , meek . Or something like,   jesus was a MEEK , good guy .  
Fucking meek as.   
Anyway...  diff post

He got picked on is what im trying to say. 
Im guessing

Hang on , i got it. 
He was a "distinguished gentlemen "
He don't know why  he never got a chick. 
I meam, he can do magic and he has heaps of friends. 
Sorry .
Had ...     heaps of freinds. 
Thats , HAD , heaps of friends , 
I say had because his dead now. 
I mean 
His sence past. 

Its past tense since his sence past. 
Nice sentence their deb. 
Thanks, thanks. 
It trigers my disleqicom thats for shizzle. The spelling is prob wrong but it is nice.

You fucking know what i mean .
He is NO more. 




Or.
Or is he. 

Well Stay the fuck tuned. 

Will the next show be. 
Jesus died and then he like didn't. 
Orrrrrr.
Oh He dead. 



Ha, Ha. 
A distinguished gentlemen.  
That my friends is a totalllllllll different post.
 
#54
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,275
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Speaking of wanking.

Do you think that Jesus didn't.
#55
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
It goes .
Bible advice  on divorce first.
Thennnnn. 
Jesus on divorce . 

Jesus on divorce. ..?
Who the fuck knows jesusus thoughts . 
well apart from being / feeling .  forsaken.   

Asking What does jesus thinks on a subject. ?
Like bloody ummm. 
We know or even entertain the notion that jesus wrote the friggen  bible. 

Why you. 
#56
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@zedvictor4
Woodwork and what bait to use around the point .

Not a fucking thing else.  
Good day sir.
#57
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Jesus from 30 up to his death was so annnnnnoying. 

Hey did i happen to tell you that im gods son. 
Yes jesus. 
We know jesus.
Gods ya daddy . 

Ya just wanted to screem at him . 
Fucking shut up kunt.
Butttttt. He was the Man.
Soooooo, ya bite ya lip. 

Before jesus , every was " crucified " on a number 10 ( x ) 
He showed the Romans his famous tennon joints. 
Getting put on a + is way worse then x 


#58
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
It appears that. 
Jesusus sole purpose. Pardon the pun.
was to make hot cross buns a ummm, a thing. 
Other then that.  

Hot cross buns. 
Arr. 
Hot cross buns. 
One a friggen penny .
Two, a friggen penny . 
Mutha fucking hot cross buns. 

I would now like to ask for A minute silence, in a time to reflect on the sacrifices people make in life for something that appeara to mean ummmm, very little. 

No god 
= 
No jesus 
= 
No HCB. 

But we have HCB,  hot cross buns . 
Right. ? 

Yesss
So continuing with my theistical science mathematics. 

there must of been a jesus ?

thus
Now get this.... 

There would of had to of been a god. 

Oh crap.  
Ive gone and done it now . 
Ive just proved god is real hey.? 
In a theistical scientific way i have. 
Mathamadicly.
Shit, sorry guys.m
Abort,  Abort. 

Starts moving eradicly
HEY GUYS LOOK. 

HEY WHAT THE HELL IS THAT OVER THERE. 
' points over there. ' 
Not there. 
Yeah there. 
What is that over there.


Then ' poof ' 
Disappears in a cloud of smoke. 
And can be heard running calling someone a fuck wit. 

Gone.



Topic's author
#59
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 336
Posts: 866
3
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
3
4
4
-->
@Stephen
A joke is right and once the person get serious, the realization will be made known about the conflict with that person .
#60
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mall
'm glad you agree with my point that these are scriptural ideas . 

Which are different from scriptural teaching, scriptural approval and condemnation.

If I ask show me in the scriptures where divorce is approved by Jesus , you either can show it or you can't. I can show you in scripture where it says it's something God hates.

That and Romans 7 all conflict with that. But in regards to what you think, your personal belief on it, you can believe divorce is justified now, apparently to what you learned in or from a false church assembly I guess.

Not in scripture , oh no.
If I showed you a spot in the Bible where God HIMSELF divorced Israel, doesn't that demonstrate that it is a valid end to a marriage covenant? And given that I think Jesus is God, wouldn't that be enough? 

Do you want me to produce that passage? Or am I to assume you know the passage I mean?