Did Jesus say that adultery is grounds for divorce? - Nope.

[St. SteVen]

In the context of ancient culture, a female divorcee could conceivably have been a more cruel fate than being widowed, unless the hardness of heart produced quite considerable abuse.

Think about it. :)

.

I wonder if divorced wives returned to the family that provided them. ??? Women were treated as property. With the charge of "fornication" the parents would give proof of virginity if the charge was considered false. The elders would decide the case.

Any woman not connected with a family would be a homeless beggar.

The book of Ruth shows how Naomi took her to be part of the family.

/

 

[St. SteVen]

New topic available.

What becomes of our faith if the Genesis account is NOT literal?

This point causes me a massive amount of cognitive dissonance. (something most won't admit) The gospel and the New Testament narrative unravel when these things aren't literal. - The geologies are meaningless. (or in serious error) - Who wrote the Books of Moses? (and when) - If Adam wasn't...

www.christianityboard.com

]

 

[Wick Stick]

Wow. That's a great cultural insight. I hope all readers got what you were writing. Thanks.

But... how do we balance that with this?

Matthew 19:8 NIV
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard.
But it was not this way from the beginning.

]

A main doctrine of Matthew's gospel is that we should internalize the law - that is, each person should enforce it on themself. And the corollary is that we shouldn't externalize it - that is, we shouldn't enforce it against each other. Some of Jesus' best quotes in Matthew are to this end - 'judge not, lest ye be judged' and 'you have heard it said, but I say to you...'

This is also the case here. If the law for adultery is externalized, then we get a nation of people running around dragging women before the judge to have them stoned. This is the 'hardness of heart' in view in chapter 19. Moses permitted divorce to prevent the nation's women from being destroyed.

Jesus points out that this is not without issue, as it causes fornication. (If there was already fornication, then this isn't a new problem and He allows it). But we are enjoined to internalize the law, which means that outside of that circumstance, men oughtn't divorce their wives if their cooking is poor or their cousin is prettier.

 

[Wick Stick]

I wonder if divorced wives returned to the family that provided them. ??? Women were treated as property. With the charge of "fornication" the parents would give proof of virginity if the charge was considered false. The elders would decide the case.

Any woman not connected with a family would be a homeless beggar.

While women were not allowed to work as laborers for others, self-employment was an option, assuming you had some marketable skill. For example, Lydia dyed and sold purple cloth.

Another option was to go to a temple and devote oneself. Such devotees either became "veiled women" with vows of chastity, or "prophetesses" whose function was the opposite... to provide ecstatic experiences to worshipers, usually as sex-workers.

The story of Jephthah's daughter (Judges 11) is an example of the former.

In Isaiah we have an example of both... in chapter 7, God gives King Ahaz a sign - "a virgin shall conceive and bear a son." While this is often applied to Jesus, there is also an initial fulfillment of the prophecy. The "virgin" in question is a "virgin" because she is a woman devoted to the temple with vows of chastity. In the following chapter, Isaiah (at God's instruction) has sex with her and makes her pregnant, and she is no longer called "virgin" but instead "prophetess."

We know from the Bible that female devotees at the Jewish temple became seamstresses whose work was to maintain the massive curtains that were a feature of the temple. The Roman goddess Vesta's temple was likewise famous for its chaste attendants - the Vestal Virgins. Prostitutes attending the temples of fertility goddesses are also well-attested historically.

 

[Grailhunter]

The position of the church and society at large is mistaken as to what Jesus was quoted as saying in the gospels. IMHO
Let's discuss.

Questions:
1) What did Jesus actually say?
2) Why did he say it?
3) If we got this wrong, where do we go from here?

The position of the church and society at large is that adultery (sexual immorality) is grounds for divorce.
And they will quote Jesus as an authority on this. But is Jesus being misquoted? Yes, I believe so.
The biggest problem is the disconnect we have with the culture that Jesus was speaking to.

The church teaches that the only grounds for divorce is adultery. (sexual immorality)
But that is not what Jesus actually said.

The basis for this teaching is found in Matthew 19:9
See the NIV translation below, taking note of verse 10 as well as verse 9. (at the very bottom of this post)
Then compare the KJV below that. Note the use of the word "fornication" which matches the NT Greek.

This makes a HUGE difference, especially when considering the cultural setting of the Israelites under the law.
Jesus was saying that the only grounds for divorce is fornication, which is sexual intercourse before marriage. (not after)
What does this mean? Both in the historical context and to the misinterpretation assigned by the church today. ???

For the Israelites, a bride's parents presented her as a virgin to her husband-to-be. The law of Moses made a provision for this.
If the husband-to-be discovered that he had been given a bride that was not a virgin, he could divorce her. (for fornication)
Unfortunately, some new husbands were making false claims in order to divorce their new brides. The fornication loophole.
Parents were allowed to challenge this claim if it was false. See Deuteronomy 22:16-18

Therefore, the KJV translation is correct and the church got it wrong.
Jesus said there is no grounds for divorce except for fornication. Now read verse 10 again.
Better not to marry? Indeed. Not if you have ANY plans to divorce.

Matthew 19:8-10 NIV
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

--- COMPARE ---

Matthew 19:8-10 KJV
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives:
but from the beginning it was not so.
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.
10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

/

I know you are trying to straighten things out….a good intent. But you got some things wrong. And the scriptures do not answer all the questions.

The word Fornication is not in the scriptures….the translators lumped a bunch of Greek words for various sexual sins into the words fornication or sexual misconduct. The word fornication appears in less accurate Bibles and sexual misconduct or variants thereof appears in modern Bibles. So the word fornication does not match the NT Greek or any scriptures….LOL because fornication is 5th century Latin word.
Time traveling word?

So Christ could not have referred to Fornication….that is in any language….it comes from the Latin in the 5th century. Even if the word was around in the 1st century He would not have used it because back then you could not get married before having sex because couples had to have sex to be married. No requirement in the Old or New Testament for a wedding ceremony to be married. The sexual union was the consummation of the marriage. So two single people having sex was not a sin…..as long as they stayed together.

Second point, In the Gospels...Christ was talking to Jews about the Mosaic Law pertaining to the Letter of Divorcement and the discussion did not define how many wives these Jews had. He could say that if they divorce a wife that they could not remarry…..but they could have had 4 wives. Even to this the Apostles pushed back on it….Saying, If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry. And Christ kinda sets the whole thing on its ear because He suggested that Moses wrote the Law on divorcement. Bottom line this all is a conversation between Jews about the Mosaic Law. Very little of it actually pertains to Christians.

In fact Jewish Law has nothing to do with Christian marriages or divorces….We do not follow those rules for a lot of reasons but for one they were based on the belief that women where property…. first of their father and then sold to there husband.

Why was Christ against Jewish divorce? It was cruel. The Jews would sometimes divorce older wives to take on younger wives. A divorced Jewish wife had nowhere to go and it was almost a death sentence. They had no rights to children or property. Other Jewish men would not marry them and younger divorcees often ended up as prostitutes.

So what does all this mean to Christians? Well in the 1st century, Christians were still practicing polygamy. But I am not going to address that….

Christianity did not adopt the Jewish Letter of Divorcement and civil courts did not deal with divorces until the middle ages. And women were not allowed to divorce their husbands until the early 1900’s. So how did Christians deal with divorcement? Answer…. they did not. If a woman left her husband it was considered adultery and in some cases she was killed.

Was Christianity following what the Bible said? NO. There is no Christian process for divorce in the scriptures. Paul discusses couples separating in cases of infidelity but does not use the word divorce because divorce is a Jewish concept that does not apply. He discusses a husband leaving his wife or a wife leaving her husband. Walk away….put away. But that did not mean they were unmarried and they were not suppose to remarry. And Paul does not discuss the issues of children and property. And there were no courts to regulate it so in function it was all a loose understanding.

So now the question is….how much of this are we going to adopt into Christianity today? Well we adopted the word divorce and the civil courts made a lucrative business of it.

Is infidelity the only reason for divorce? Should divorce be a knee jerk reaction to infidelity? What about the children, the scriptures do not address that? Should a wife stay with a husband that physically or mentally abuses her and the children. Beating your wife every Friday night is not infidelity. Should couples that are no longer in love remain together? There is going to be different opinions on this. And there should be some reasonable regulations and responsibilities, but I am not sure if limiting them to what the Bible says is the answer….what say you?

 

[St. SteVen]

The word Fornication is not in the scriptures….

Are you sure?

Matthew 5:32 KJV
But 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.

]

 

[Grailhunter]

Are you sure?

Matthew 5:32 KJV
But 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.

]

Ya the KJV. I have some very old KJV's, been collecting them for years. But there is large list of errors in them.

My ministry is not just about false beliefs but I do try to help people with them. The word fornication has caused some harmful beliefs in Christianity, it has caused people to sin, it has caused lost souls, and deaths. It has a long history and a trail of misery. And it even distorts history.

It is part of the study of false beliefs, as in their power and destructive nature and why people cling to them to the point that they are a part of their central beliefs.

 

[St. SteVen]

The word fornication has caused some harmful beliefs in Christianity...

Could you speak to that specifically? What harm do you see?

/

 

[Grailhunter]

Could you speak to that specifically? What harm do you see?

/

Fornication is a Christian tragedy.
This word is another prime example of why we should not make up words and stick them in the Bible, because they cause misunderstandings and false beliefs that can span over a thousand years, they can distort the meaning of the scriptures and ultimately cause people to sin, leading to lost souls and even deaths. The word fornication is not in the scriptures nor is its definition yet it redefined the marriage process for the entire Bible....even history.

Fornication is based on the word porneia which mostly pertains to prostitutes. Which was not a negative term in the Greco-Roman culture. But the Christian religion thought differently. There are variances to the Greek word porneia that define various sexual activities throughout the New Testament …. all of which are in the scriptures and all of which Christianity considers sinful.

The false beliefs associated with the word fornication started a long long time ago. If you noticed there was no wedding ceremony or vows in Eden. And then you can read the rest of the Bible and find no requirement for wedding ceremonies or vows. Yep! That is right the Bible does not state a requirement for a wedding ceremony to be married in the Old or New Testament. People formed marriages as God described… For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24 Neither the Old or New Testament state a requirement for wedding ceremonies. The fact is the words wed or wedding do not appear in the scriptures. The Old Testament….the Hebrew language did not have words for wed or wedding….the Greek language did

….and there is a reason for that… Weddings ceremonies come from Pagan cultures and customs. When the Apostle Paul started converting Pagans into Christianity they brought this custom with them. Scholars are certain that after that point weddings where occurring voluntarily….still no requirement.

But history does not record a Christian wedding until the 9th century.

It was about 1500 years, after the biblical period, around 1550 to be more accurate that Christianity as in the Protestants developed a requirement for church weddings ceremonies and vows, and that is a fact.

So you might think; What about the Wedding in Cana? Actually and again the words wed or wedding does not appear anywhere in the scriptures. The event in Cana was called a marriage in the actual scriptures.

The word fornication includes many types of sexual sins but after the Protestants made church weddings a requirement the understanding of this word was mostly about two people having sex without having a wedding ceremony first and that being a sin. It was not so before this time, before this if two people in love coupled up and formed a family, it was called a marriage. Of course this does not include casual sex. And I am not saying that there was not a process for marriage. In the Old Testament this could include Jewish marriage contracts that involved the fathers or the father and the groom. Which was more less a matter buying the bride with money or property of some sort. The bride herself representing property being sold. And this continued on into Christianity.

But still why after all that time, why didn’t the Catholic Church have a requirement for wedding ceremonies? So why did the Catholic Church wait until November 11th 1563 at the Council of Trent to make a wedding ceremony a requirement for marriage? In “bold” because this is the historical crux of the matter. And it was not until after this that the Catholic Church allowed weddings inside their Churches which is another hint as to the Catholic Church’s attitude toward weddings.

This is a long story so I will have to generalize here. The scriptures….the Bible is not a romance manual. It was written in a time when the number one priority was spreading the Gospel and saving souls and people thought that the time was short. So romance and focus on the family….not so much. But what did that cause?

Now was it because of that, that Christians started to believe some odd things on their own? Some things a smart person has to admit that no one knows or you will make a fool out of yourself trying to explain it, so I will pose questions.

Was there a biblical reason that Christians began to believe that sex was dirty, nasty, and sinful and of the Devil? It seemed to occur early on.

Was it a mental conundrum? Can there be a social religious mental conundrum?

Was it attached to the belief that Christians should suffer because Christ suffered? Was sex demonized because sexual pleasure is the opposite of suffering?

Were women demonized because in a male dominate society and religion, did women represent the temptation of good men to get involved with something that was dirty, nasty and sinful? Thus putting women in the role of Satan.

Christianity already portrayed Eve as the tempter of Adam and the fall of man. Was this just another nail in the coffin of feminine distain?

Was it the sound character of a word? This is almost humorous…. Fornication just sounds dirty and evil. It is like the word Lucifer, which sounds evil. LOL but what is a Latin word doing in a Hebrew text?….is it another time traveling word? LOL Lucifer is the Latin name for the planet Venus, the morning star….a feminine name and a name of a goddess. But it is not another name for Satan and it really does not have anything to do with the storyline in Isaiah 14. But Geez it sounds so neat! It was silly to put a Latin word in a Hebrew text but it deceived millions and millions. LOL Even the educated…..People got to know that men have had no problem with messing with the scriptures. They Just put what they wanted in there or take it out, just like they took God the Father’s name out of the Old Testament…..6,800 times! I hope they end up screaming in the lowest level of Hell for that.

Either way sex is linked to the dirtiest nastiest sins and women were linked to sex as in the male desire for it. Was all this the cause of the apex of atrocities against women by the Catholic Church during the witch-hunts and inquisitions? Where women were horribly tortured, raped, their bodies tore apart and burned because of this. So despicable and gruesome were these atrocities that it is hard to imagine that humans were the ones performing them let alone Christian clergy at the approval of the Pope. So despicable was all this that it would make your average Christian puke.

Very hard to believe? But history records it at the local level and in general academic history. And because these atrocities were mostly directed and witnessed and documented by a board of Catholic clergy, these documents are in the Vatican Library. Of course we do not have access to that….maybe in time?

But we do have copies of the torture manual issued by the Catholic Church known as the Malleus Maleficarum….the Hammer of Witches. Beyond that in modern times the Catholic Church apologized for these atrocities…. among others.

And then to one of the reasons I brought this up, which was to illustrate how dangerous and harmful and deadly, false beliefs can be. And then how powerful and how enduring they can be and how much sin they can cause…..They took the largest Christian Church and gave it the character of Satan. Because I contend that the human heart could not do this alone. Would Satan want to throw a wrench in the cogs of the normal process of Christian reproduction and marriage and families?

Of course the word fornication contributed to this in a large way because it was well known….preached from the pulpit and it instilled a perception in society. This was reinforced by the false belief of Original Sin which became a doctrine…Which promoted the belief that sin was perpetuated by sex with women and women delivering babies full of sin to the world, so there was no way to stop it, no way to escape it, it was all because of sex and women.

But to make all this possible what had to happen first was to make women powerless and degraded them to a second rate status in society and religion ….that happened in the Old Testament where women were demoted to property. And this continued into Christianity….But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 1st Corinthians 11:3 So on into Christianity fathers continued to control who their daughters married and money was exchanged in marriage arrangements.

So as it was the word fornication was the banner that influenced all of this heavily. Which means as Christians we need to beware of false beliefs and denounce them at every opportunity. The red flag for the average Christian is a word that does not appear in the scriptures. You can bet there is a man or men behind that and they want you to believe a lie.

The history of the word fornication
In the actual scriptures specific sexual sins had individual words. Today a lot of modern translations lump all these words for sexual activities under the phrase sexual immorality. But back in the older translations they lumped all these Greek words for sinful sexual activities into the word fornication. But then they added another meaning to fornication….
Continued.......

 

[Grailhunter]

From the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance fornication…
illicit sexual intercourse, adultery, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. Sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11-12 The worship of idols of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols etc. The key words here being illicit sex as in sex without a wedding ceremony.

But Fornication is not a translational error it is a non-biblical word that made its way into the 15th through the 17th century English translations of the Bible, but still this word did not originate in these Bibles.

When the Greek text was translated into the Latin Vulgate, (circa 404 AD) the word porneia and its variants were translated to the Latin word fornica which does not mean sex or prostitutes but rather where prostitutes would gather to wait for their customers. Then it was translated to the English word fornication and was used in the original Tyndale, Geneva, and King James Version of the Bible.

Part of the problem was that the New Testament was an attempt to write Christian moral standards using a Pagan language…ie the Greek language that did not have words that reflected Christian standards. The Greeks - Romans did not have the same moral standards that Christians had. For example; If you told a Roman solider that he sinned, it meant that his arrow missed the target….no moral implication. So the Christians writers were taking Greek words and adjusting them to have Christian moral definitions. Why?

Well in this case, in the Greco-Roman culture various sexual activities were not considered immoral. It did not matter if it was temple prostitutes or orgies. Married Roman men were free to have sex with who they wanted …female or male. By Christian standards this was a disgusting arrangement. In the Roman culture adultery was not a sin, rather it was illegal to have sex with someone else’s wife. So Christian writers were tasked with conveying sexual morality from a culture that was without sexual morals and their language reflected the absence of the words to describe sexual immorality. Now was all this confusing to the translators of the scriptures, it is a matter of debate.

Like I said, Porneia in the Greek society is mostly a reference to prostitution which was not wrong in their culture. For example pornography, comes from an ancient Greek word that means writings or paintings of prostitutes and they where not even considered vulgar by the Pagans, many Roman homes had murals of sex acts and or prostitutes on their walls and tiles on the floors.

So then in the actual scriptures the Greek word Porneia and its variances appear several times. In all cases the Christian writers were using them to point out some specific forms of sexual immorality.

Examples of the words that actually appeared in the scriptures…..
πορνείας·… porneias … Sexual immorality
πορνείᾳ … porneiai … Sexual immorality in the plural
πορνεῦσαι … To commit sexual immorality involving sexual acts
πορνείαν … Idolatry involving sexual acts
πόρνος … A person that practices sexual immorality
πόρνοι … Refering to as a group of the sexually immoral
πορνεῖαι … inflectional, more or less dirty thoughts

Appearing in these scriptures….
Matthew 5:32, 5:19, Mark 7:21, John 8:4, Acts 15:20, 5:29, 21:25, Romans 1:29, 1st Corinthians 5:1, 5:9, 5:10, 6:13, 6:18, 7:2, 10:8, 2nd Corinthians 12:21, Galatians 5:19, Ephesians 5:3, Colossians 3:5, 1st Thessalonians 4:3, Jude 1:7, Revelation 2:14, 2:14, 2:20, 2:21, 9:21, 14:8, 17:2, 17:4, 18:3, 18:19, 19:2

But then translations just lumped all these words into fornication or sexual immorality. But in no case does sexual immorality simply apply to two unmarried people having sex, for a very good reason. The New Testament does not have a lot to say about romantic love. But to say that sex outside of wedlock is a sin would be inaccurate, since the Bible has no requirements for wedding ceremonies or vows. For most of our history marriages were formed by the union alone. Which is accurately described in Genesis 2:24.

In other words when a couple joined this consummated the marriage. And so it was for most of our known history …two unmarried people would have sex to be married. Of course this is not a random thing. LOL All through the Old Testament and into Christianity marriages were generally a matter of arrangement by the fathers and a lot of the times money or property was exchanged. In the 12th century, Pope Alexander III decreed that marriage was the sole decision of a man and woman, not the parents. Although an official decree this custom is still practiced today, limitedly.

And of course some or a lot of marriages were celebrated by friends and family. But some of these Jewish marriage celebrations would be offensive to Christians today because the high point of these celebrations was the guests listening for the bride to cry out when she was penetrated in the bridal chamber.

The story of the marriage at Cana picks up at the reception. The Bible tells us nothing about the marriage, not even who was getting married or why it was important to Christ and His mother or why it was important enough for Christ’s mother to ask for a miracle….turning the water into fine wine.

The 3rd century
The word Fornication evolved in the Latin and focused on the Greek word porneia, indirectly as in the place where prostitutes waited for their customers. The Latin word “forn” means arch or vaulted ceiling. In Ancient Rome, it was known that prostitutes would wait for their customers out of the hot sun or rain in areas that had cover…. vaulted ceilings. The Latin word fornix became a euphemism for brothels and the Latin verb fornicare referred to a man visiting a brothel. Meaning a man being serviced by prostitutes. At this point these are not religious terms.

The 5th century
So then St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation of the scriptures used a variant of that….fornicatio and lumped all the Greek variances of porneia –sexual misconduct under that word.

The first recorded use of the word fornication in English is in the 14th century, in a poem called the Cursor Mundi.

The first English Bibles to use the word fornication was the Bishop’s Bible---Church of England 1568, the Catholic Bible called the Douay-Rheims Bible (early 1600’s) and then the Protestant Bibles followed suite in the Tyndale Bible, the Geneva Bible and the King James Version of the Bible, 16th and 17th centuries respectively.

So the bottom line, marriages in the Bible and most of history were formed by the physical act of joining. This is a biblical and historical fact. But the word Fornication duped millions of Christians into thinking that wedding ceremonies were required in the Old and New Testaments. So now you know the power of false beliefs.

Even if the Hebrew families held a marriage celebration, there was no Hebrew word for wed or wedding nor any biblically stated requirement for ceremonies or vows or rings....just the Bridal Chamber where the couple consummated their marriage. Modern Jews still use a symbolic bridal chamber that is more of a canopy called the Chuppah where the bride and groom stand during the ceremony.

The fact that it is the union that forms a marriage still exists in civil laws. In most states and countries a couple that does not have sex after the wedding ceremony (consummate) can get their marriage annulled.

Fornication is a well known case study in how man-made terms and phrases that are false can have a powerful and detrimental and long lasting affect on not only the meaning of the scriptures and perceptions but also the understanding of history itself.

Continued.....

 

[Grailhunter]

For example; a man and a woman fall in love and have sex and then from there on remain together, from the biblical perceptive, they are married. But Christians, believing various false beliefs can condemn them because of the definition of fornication, which is …it is a sin for two people that have not had a wedding ceremony to have sex and live together, so ergo the terms “shacking up or living in sin.”

Then people believing that they are “living in sin” may make the couple feel unwelcome in church and could turn them away from Christianity. Which are the only sins that occurred here. The sin of gossip, the sin of falsely accusing people of a sin, and the sin of turning them away from Christianity. And then calling their children bastards. Well on Judgment Day Christ may say to Bill, You condemned Tim and his wife for not having a marriage ceremony and living together and turned them away from me and their souls were lost ….so what am I to do with you? This is how false beliefs can cause atrocities and sin.

Had a preacher tell me once that the normal attraction that couples in love feel for each other is lust and so all marriages are formed by lust and husband’s desire for his wife is lust. Of course he was wrong but this is actually a long standing false belief. Strangely enough there was a time when the Church believed that the desire a husband and wife had for each other was a sin. In affect contradicting God because He described the process that is correct…. For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. God designed men and women to be attracted to each other, fall in love and form marriages and families. And sex to be the bond between husbands and wives that love each other. No sin occurs in the process that God designed. And no, babies are not full of sin because of Original Sin…. another false belief.

There is also the belief that the fruit of the tree mentioned in the scriptures was an apple and the apple was symbolic of sex and sin, so the fall of mankind was linked to women and sex. (And just so you know the scriptures call it fruit of the tree not an apple.) So then according to Augustine (circa 354-430 AD) the sex act being designated as sinful would mean that the sin of Adam and Eve would be passed on to babies, through women, calling it Original Sin. Which is another manmade term that does not appear in the Bible, but has been taught to Christians. Original Sin is another false belief. This produced the belief that babies can go to hell. And was one of the reasons for coming up with need for infant baptizing. False belief can cause people to do weird things….Augustine was a sexual deviant completely out of control. He confesses that in his own writings and because he could not control himself he thought no one could control themselves and eventually believed women and sex were of the devil….and thus the idea of Original Sin was born and the primer for the witch hunts.

It is better explained that Adam and Eve and their offspring promulgated the nature of humans which do not have the awareness and wisdom of God so they make mistakes and are slow to learn morality. Case in point; From Adam and Eve to the time of Christ people were making mistakes and then subscribed to a moral code that was cruel and weak on fairness and morality ….the Mosaic Law.

For even in Christ time and well past it, Jews and Christians had slaves and had multiple wives and were selling their daughters as sex slaves…. concubines and this is a double edged sin. Some of us are old enough to remember when most men wanted to marry virgins….The early Jews and Christians took it a step back from this because their definition of fresh or clean girls meant before they started menstruating. Which means that a lot of the concubines and wives were taken before that. Which we would call sex with minors. (The minimum age for marriage under Jewish law for girls was 12 years old----the Jewish Virtual Library.) Men that want to have sex with minors point to this fact and it is disgusting.

All in context though….the scriptures never put a moratorium on polygamy or concubinage so technically this was not a biblical sin, which Martin Luther pointed out when he said he could not condemn polygamy because the Bible did not condemn it. Martin Luther's Estate of Marriage 1522.

But still the Christian conscience should have realized all this was wrong.

So of course Christian couples in love that couple up and stay together and have children even though they have not had a wedding are married and are as good a Christians as anybody and should be welcomed in church. Again this is where false beliefs do harm to Christianity by turning people away from Christ and commit sins by unjustly condemning people thereby piling hot coals on their own heads. And besides if they are welcomed in a church and associate with Christians, there is a good chance they will have a church wedding ceremony. Sometimes patience is love.

And then of course the rest of the Christian standards regarding sexual immorality are correct. Adultery, Homosexuality, prostitution, and casual sex are all serious sins. Casual sex is just as serious a sin as the rest of them.

Some think that the sins of casual sex are not as serious but as it turns out casual sex is one of those swords that has many edges. If you go out carousing with the intent to find a piece for the night….you sinned before you left. If you have sex with someone and do not remain together, that is a sin but you are still married. And if you have sex with someone else after that….it is adultery.

The Truth that makes it all make sense is that God intended for sex to be enjoyed between a man and woman that love each other to form a bond…. Functionally sex is for making babies. It is also the love and intimacy and the children that holds the marriages together.

I knew a young couple that were planning on getting married. And when she invited me to the wedding to actually marry them, she told me that the most romantic thing about her fiancé was that he was so excited about her having his children and being a father. She said it meant so many good things to her. Love and respect and he was in it for a family. It made the wedding ceremony so much more enjoyable for her….she could not stop smiling.

Now I have to clarify something concerning the Catholic Church. I am a theologian and a historian so I can tell you about the God awful things that the Catholic Church did in the day. But in all honesty the modern Catholic Church is better than it ever has been. Theologians do not generally indorse any one denomination because they all have theological errors. But I love and fellowship and stand and worship the Lord with several different denominations and that includes the Catholics.

So then are wedding ceremonies necessary? Necessary….Yes….biblically required ….No. The Jewish-Christian sect of Christianity….which meant most of the Apostles and their Jewish-Christians followers died out by the end of the 1st century. At which point the Gentile-Christians took the helm of the church. When the Pagans as we call them converted to Christianity they changed their religion but not their culture. Gentiles from all over the Middle East had differing cultures, but the one thing that was common was wedding ceremonies and celebrations. And they brought that custom into Christianity and even today a lot of what goes on at Christian weddings and receptions comes from their customs.

It boils down to making that day publicly special and exchanging vows to each other in front of their friends and family and God, followed by the reception which celebrates that day. A memory of that special day that they will have for the rest of their lives.

So then the Protestants made church weddings mandatory to be married. As far I am concerned a great decision.

 

[St. SteVen]

The position of the church and society at large is mistaken as to what Jesus was quoted as saying in the gospels. IMHO
Let's discuss.

Questions:
1) What did Jesus actually say?
2) Why did he say it?
3) If we got this wrong, where do we go from here?

See the OP for more info.

[

 

[Behold]

See the NIV translation below, taking note of verse 10 as well as verse 9. (at the very bottom of this post)

The NIV is a terrible translation.

However, and setting that aside.

Let me show the reader the correct understanding of Adultery, as its 100% misunderstood on forums and in pulpits and in seminaries.

The verse says.......>"So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress:"""


Now did you read it carefully this time?

It says......""If while her HUSBAND liveth."""........"""she be married to another man""........= Adulteress".

Now, that is not fornication., as its always incorrectly taught....... its a woman with .........2 HUSBANDS.

So what is that?

A.) Adultery.

Now the reason that Jesus lists "fornication".........as a reason for divorce....

So, to understand this, you have to understand that Jesus is God, and God is explaining marriage... like this.

"a man shall leave his parents and CLEAVE to his WIFE".

A.) Cleave = "2 shall be (become) ONE Flesh"....

See that? that is "sexual intimacy" that is : Intercourse...........or "cleaving to your wife" if you are a male, or "flesh joining flesh" as "ONE".

That is how God defines "marriage". along with "what God has joined".... and that is why Paul tells us to "flee fornication" as its "flesh joining flesh". as "ONE">.

So, have you fornicated a lot in your life, reader?
Well guess what........
Do the math.

Now if you are born again, then all of that is under the blood of Jesus, forgiven, forgotten, as if you never had that past life.
If you are a real CHRISTian, born again.......(not just water baptized and religious) then you are a "NEW Creation", and "old things have passed away"......like your past sin life......as God does not remember it.......so, you should let it go also.
So, it..... your past, your past deeds.... have no bearing on you now., as you are "made righteous" forever.

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
See the NIV translation below, taking note of verse 10 as well as verse 9. (at the very bottom of this post)

The NIV is a terrible translation.

The point is the comparison.

[

 

[Grailhunter]

The NIV is a terrible translation.

However, and setting that aside.

Let me show the reader the correct understanding of Adultery, as its 100% misunderstood on forums and in pulpits and in seminaries.

The verse says.......>"So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress:"""


Now did you read it carefully this time?

It says......""If while her HUSBAND liveth."""........"""she be married to another man""........= Adulteress".

Now, that is not fornication., as its always incorrectly taught....... its a woman with .........2 HUSBANDS.

So what is that?

A.) Adultery.

Now the reason that Jesus lists "fornication".........as a reason for divorce....

So, to understand this, you have to understand that Jesus is God, and God is explaining marriage... like this.

"a man shall leave his parents and CLEAVE to his WIFE".

A.) Cleave = "2 shall be (become) ONE Flesh"....

See that? that is "sexual intimacy" that is : Intercourse...........or "cleaving to your wife" if you are a male, or "flesh joining flesh" as "ONE".

That is how God defines "marriage". along with "what God has joined".... and that is why Paul tells us to "flee fornication" as its "flesh joining flesh". as "ONE">.

So, have you fornicated a lot in your life, reader?
Well guess what........
Do the math.

Now if you are born again, then all of that is under the blood of Jesus, forgiven, forgotten, as if you never had that past life.
If you are a real CHRISTian, born again.......(not just water baptized and religious) then you are a "NEW Creation", and "old things have passed away"......like your past sin life......as God does not remember it.......so, you should let it go also.
So, it..... your past, your past deeds.... have no bearing on you now., as you are "made righteous" forever.

Now the reason that Jesus lists "fornication".........as a reason for divorce....

Christ could not have listed fornication......LOL It is not a biblical word, it is a 4th century scam.

 

[Behold]

St. SteVen said:
See the NIV translation below,

The point is the comparison.

But you ruin the comparison, if the NIV is included, because its a terrible translation.

If you want to use the NIV< then use it as....>"now here is how we spot a terrible translation"., and in that case, the NIV finds its absolute purpose.

 

[St. SteVen]

Now the reason that Jesus lists "fornication".........as a reason for divorce....

Christ could not have listed fornication......LOL It is not a biblical word, it is a 4th century scam.

From the OP.

For the Israelites, a bride's parents presented her as a virgin to her husband-to-be. The law of Moses made a provision for this.
If the husband-to-be discovered that he had been given a bride that was not a virgin, he could divorce her. (for fornication)
Unfortunately, some new husbands were making false claims in order to divorce their new brides. The fornication loophole.
Parents were allowed to challenge this claim if it was false. See Deuteronomy 22:16-18

[

 

[Grailhunter]

From the OP.

For the Israelites, a bride's parents presented her as a virgin to her husband-to-be. The law of Moses made a provision for this.
If the husband-to-be discovered that he had been given a bride that was not a virgin, he could divorce her. (for fornication)
Unfortunately, some new husbands were making false claims in order to divorce their new brides. The fornication loophole.
Parents were allowed to challenge this claim if it was false. See Deuteronomy 22:16-18

[

20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you. Deuteronomy 22:20-21

This based on the fact that the Mosaic Law and the Jews treated women as property. Husband paid the price to the father and the property was expected to be a virgin.

Many Jewish marriage had family celebrations….not weddings as we know them….the bridle chamber occurred during the celebration….in other words the union occurs during the celebration. Afterward the mother would enter the bridle chamber and collect the sheets with blood on them to prove her daughter virginity. This is the proof of the woman’s virginity mentioned above.

Also a man could divorce a new bride for any reason.

And then there is a test for a woman that is accused of adultery.
11 Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah[a] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing. Numbers 5:11—31 Not all copied here

But the word fornication nor its definition is a biblical word. Nothing in the scriptures can be translated to fornication. The word fornication and its definition occurs around the 4th century and it is a scam.

 

[St. SteVen]

But the word fornication nor its definition is a biblical word. Nothing in the scriptures can be translated to fornication. The word fornication and its definition occurs around the 4th century and it is a scam.

Why do you say it is a scam?

[

 

[Grailhunter]

Why do you say it is a scam?

[

It is trying to promote things that are false. False religious beliefs and false reality.

There is nothing in the scriptures that can be translated to fornication and it was a word that had evolving definitions after the 4th century.

In the 4th century it was a word that came from the Latin that had a close association with prostitution.
It then evolved to include all sexual misconduct.
The scriptures have specific Greek words for various sex acts that Christians considered sinful.
Bible translations after the 16th century lumped all these words to fornication.

Then another definition evolved meaning that if two unmarried people have sex it is sin, which is false.
For most of history two single people having sex was how they formed a marriage. Which went a long the lines of ….
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24

There is no requirement in the scriptures for a wedding ceremony to be married. For one the ceremony was a pagan custom that the converted Gentiles brought into Christianity, which was not mandatory until the 16th century when Protestants made a church wedding a requirement to be married. Up to that point even the Catholic Church did not require a wedding.