Questions about divorce

B in R i guess we will just disagree on this.
The 1901 Webster dictionary uses these difinitions:
Here is the definitions of the two:
Fornication 1. Unlawful sexual intercourse on the part of an unmarried person; the act of such illicit sexual intercourse between a man and a woman as does not by law amount to adultery. &hand; In England, the offense, though cognizable in the ecclesiastical courts, was not at common law subject to secular prosecution. In the United States it is indictable in some States at common law, in others only by statute. Whartyon.

Adultery: 1. The unfaithfulness of a married person to the marriage bed; sexual intercourse by a married man with another than his wife, or voluntary sexual intercourse by a married woman with another than her husband.

It is adultery on the part of the married wrongdoer. The word has also been used to characterize the act of an unmarried participator, the other being married. In the United States the definition varies with the local statutes. Unlawful intercourse between two married persons is sometimes called double adultery; between a married and an unmarried person, single adultery

They are 2 different things and Only fornication is allowable for a Bill of Divorce.

I hope we can agree and I think we do, that in this sin as well as other sins, God's forgiveness thru His mercy is unlimited.

 

Apparently, more than some…..

One more time, let’s take a look at your comment to Helen that was posted on March 11, 2004 @ 10:50 AM:

“No divorce, no remarriage. Remarriage after divorce is adultery in every circumstance.”

Note that you used the phrase “every circumstance.” That is completely wrong, and the Scriptural Passages you cite do not support your contention.

Deuteronomy 24 clearly disproves your claim.
Matthew 5 and 19 also clearly disprove your claim.
I Corinthians 7 clearly disproves your claim.
[A point worth noting is that your claim of “every circumstance” is in direct contrast to what Jesus said.]

So, one more time, Here is your quote again:
“No divorce, no remarriage. Remarriage after divorce is adultery in every circumstance.”

You have yet to prove the validity of this statement.

Wow, I just KNEW this was coming. Isn’t it amazing that, in your world, contumely and disparaging comments are synonymous with pastoral love? You have shown nothing in terms of pastoral love, and this is quite obvious
Moreover, I love how you equate your love for the truth with your superciliousness. How fortunate for you that this is justifiable in your world. I would be curious where Jesus utilized cantankerous comments to minister to the flock. Please show us how your comments exemplify the Love of Christ.

You are becoming quite predictable. I suppose you will now offer a comment that “nothing shall offend them” or something similar.

Ditto.

This is by far the most ludicrous statement you have made thus far, other than your false claim of “no divorce no remarriage.” This post is the FIRST time in this thread that you have offered any Scripture to support your contention. You are more than welcome to show us where you provided any support prior to this.

I have done this more than once. As a matter of fact, I even quoted the Scriptural Passages. But you already knew that.

 

Indeed we will, but I very much enjoy debating this with you.

This is where you and I disagree on this. The word used by Jesus in this Scriptural Passage is porneia. I went to the library and checked out a 1769 Revision last week, and in the margin it says “sexual immorality.” This is an all inclusive phrase that would indicate any sexual sin, including adultery as well as homosexuality.

We do agree on this, and thank Almighty God for the Grace and Mercy He has shown to all of us.

I was driving back from Allentown, PA yesterday, and was thinking of your family, specifically your daughter. I pray that her faith in Christ is still strong, as is yours.

 

Baptist in Richmond

You said:

Note that you used the phrase “every circumstance.” That is completely wrong, and the Scriptural Passages you cite do not support your contention.

I say:

Actually, every text I gave proves it.

You said:

Deuteronomy 24 clearly disproves your claim.
Matthew 5 and 19 also clearly disprove your claim.
I Corinthians 7 clearly disproves your claim.
[A point worth noting is that your claim of “every circumstance” is in direct contrast to what Jesus said.]

I say:

It is obvious that you are unaware of the issues. What do you think I have never read those texts, and just came to a position devoid of any idea about the totality of Scripture? Get real. I have read many books and countless journal articles on this very issue. Have you? I have given this issue many, many hours of personal study just from the Scriptures. You just pop off like a bitter neighbor who just had some dog dump in your yard. When you can interact on an intelligent level, we will continue.

You said:

Isn’t it amazing that, in your world, contumely and disparaging comments are synonymous with pastoral love?

I say:

Again, it is because I love the truth, that I teach what I do. You make it seem like I love to beat people down, and then find support for that. Once again, put away childish things. Act like an adult.

(In response to my asking for just one little text that disproves me)

You said:

I have done this more than once.

I say:

If you don't or can't understand the question, please ask instead of publicly embarrassing yourself.

 

Ah, yes: when all else fails, simply drop back and claim victory.

The absurdity becomes more glaring with every post. If you have indeed “read many books and countless journal articles on this very issue,” then why are you having such difficulty with making a case for your claim? As for my alleged “pop[ping] off,” need I remind you that you are the one who makes lewd references to canine defecation in your posts, and then exhorts me to “interact on an intelligent level?” Additionally, let me remind you that I am the one who directly references your contention and challenges you to prove it. Therefore, if you have indeed given “many, many hours of personal study just from the Scriptures,” then perhaps you could stop dodging the issue at hand, cease with the juvenile contumely, and make a legitimate argument for your contentions.

Okay, now I understand: your simplistic contumely qualifies your behavior as mature. Additionally, you make opprobrious comments to people (as exhibited by this post) and, in your mind, this demonstrates your love for the Truth? Even the most casual of observers could read your comments and get the impression that, as you so adeptly implied, you “love to beat people down.” Don’t blame me: they are YOUR comments. If you do not want to give this impression, then perhaps you should alter your method of delivery.

Again, since you have ignored my question, show us how this behavior exhibits the love of Christ. If you would like an example of "pastoral love," read the post from Dr. Bob to Helen.

Once again, you have made a ludicrous statement. I have asked you on several occasions in this thread to prove your contention. This is a fact that cannot be denied. Simply claiming that your assertions are accurate does not constitute proof. You listed several Scriptural Passages that you deem as proof; however, you do not address the simple fact that several of them are in direct contrast to the contention you make. In this post, you enlightened us as to your position by analogizing my demands for you to prove your assertion with getting upset about canine defecation. Interesting that you chose this for an analogy, as it is not without a sense of irony.

So, one more time, let’s take a look at your comment to Helen that was posted on March 11, 2004 @ 10:50 AM:

“No divorce, no remarriage. Remarriage after divorce is adultery in every circumstance.”

Your comments are in direct contrast to the teaching of Jesus Himself, as well as that of the Apostle Paul. You claim that several Scriptural Passages somehow support your contention, yet you either cannot or will not show us how this is possible.

So, in the spirit of “interact[ing] on an intelligent level,” let’s examine your “many, many hours of personal study just from the Scriptures” as well as the “many books and countless journal articles on this very issue.” How can you claim “no divorce no remarriage” by virtue of your research? How does the Passage you reference in the Book of Deuteronomy prove this assertion? Why did Jesus specifically list “fornication” as an exclusion (the word “porneia”)?

I have already shown my argument using the Scriptural Passages referenced in this thread. This is true regardless of whether or not you choose to acknowledge this fact.

Now, cease with respect to your personal jabs, exhibit some maturity, demonstrate your extensive research, and prove your contention.