defending "till death do us part"

[OneLight]

 

 

 

Many believe that Jesus allows divorce for adultery. That directly contradicts "till death do us part". There is strong evidence that fully supports the long held "till death do us part", that proves that adultery is NOT a grounds for divorce.

There was a cultural divorce for fornication (not adultery) that was done while the "husband" and "wife" were only engaged (betrothed). Jesus' hearers were very familiar with this kind of divorce. The texts in Matt 5:31,32 and 19:9 function perfectly when this perspective of the exception clause is embraced. When the perspective that Jesus allowed divorce for adultery is held, then Matt 5:31,32 and 19:9 contradict each other as well as themselves.

Till death do us part is not even in scripture. And scripture never contradicts itself.   God always wants  the relationship restored.  Healing and forgiveness is always what He desires.  But adultery was grounds for divorce.  But again restoration was what He wants.

 

 

"Till death do us part" is a spin off of Matthew 19:6

 

So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.

 

I just said that "Till death do us part was not in the Bible, I didn't say I agreed with divorce.  I would rather see the relationship mended as only God can do.

 

 

I was not even indication what you believe one way or another, just joining in on where the saying came from.

[A_Voice]

OneLight,

What reference material are you referring to? You asked me to supply the reference material I am using? Using for what? I don't understand.

[OneLight]

OneLight,

What reference material are you referring to? You asked me to supply the reference material I am using? Using for what? I don't understand.

 

The clarification on how words are being used.  I showed how the Greek used words is specific verses.  I was asking what you use to show that what you are presenting is true.

[A_Voice]

OneLight

 

Concerning the word fornication:

The words fornication and adultery are listed side by side at least 3 times in the NT. This is beside where the two words are in the same sentences in Matt 5:31,32 and 19:9. There is a clear difference between the two words. Take for example "Jane and John, both 15, were caught committing fornication." Here it is obvious that this is a premarital sexual offence as evidenced by their young ages. The word adultery is not at all available to be used here.

 

The word fornication has more than one definition. One of those is its exclusive premarital definition that would apply to the sentence above.

If a sentence has such a word with more than one definition, and it is uncertain what definition was intended, then all the definitions can be tried. The one that makes the sentence perfectly competent is the right one. That is what has happened to Matt 5:31,32 and 19:9. The wrong definition was used. That is why BOTH sentences literally contradict themselves and each other when fornication in that particular context is assumed to mean adultery. That is why when the betrothal explanation is used for the kind of divorce the exception clause is referring to, the sentences function perfectly.

 

Adultery has a specific definition. It is the sexual violation of a marriage. When adultery and fornication are listed side by side as we see in the NT, it is natural to see fornication as pointing mostly to the premarital since adultery is specifically the post marital. When listed side by side, they naturally compare with one another. Another example of two words that overlap are "thieves" and "extortioners". Both of these deal with wrongfully taking from someone. Both are theft. Extortion is a specific type of theft. But sometimes the word extortion is completely inappropriate to use. When speaking specifically of having had something taken from you unawares behind your back, then theft and not extortion is what is meant. So there we see two specific types of stealing yet both may be called theft.

Extortion is theft, but not all theft is extortion.   Adultery is fornication but not all fornication is adultery.

[OneLight]

OneLight

 

Concerning the word fornication:

The words fornication and adultery are listed side by side at least 3 times in the NT. This is beside where the two words are in the same sentences in Matt 5:31,32 and 19:9. There is a clear difference between the two words. Take for example "Jane and John, both 15, were caught committing fornication." Here it is obvious that this is a premarital sexual offence as evidenced by their young ages. The word adultery is not at all available to be used here.

 

The word fornication has more than one definition. One of those is its exclusive premarital definition that would apply to the sentence above.

If a sentence has such a word with more than one definition, and it is uncertain what definition was intended, then all the definitions can be tried. The one that makes the sentence perfectly competent is the right one. That is what has happened to Matt 5:31,32 and 19:9. The wrong definition was used. That is why BOTH sentences literally contradict themselves and each other when fornication in that particular context is assumed to mean adultery. That is why when the betrothal explanation is used for the kind of divorce the exception clause is referring to, the sentences function perfectly.

 

Adultery has a specific definition. It is the sexual violation of a marriage. When adultery and fornication are listed side by side as we see in the NT, it is natural to see fornication as pointing mostly to the premarital since adultery is specifically the post marital. When listed side by side, they naturally compare with one another. Another example of two words that overlap are "thieves" and "extortioners". Both of these deal with wrongfully taking from someone. Both are theft. Extortion is a specific type of theft. But sometimes the word extortion is completely inappropriate to use. When speaking specifically of having had something taken from you unawares behind your back, then theft and not extortion is what is meant. So there we see two specific types of stealing yet both may be called theft.

Extortion is theft, but not all theft is extortion.   Adultery is fornication but not all fornication is adultery.

 

A_Voice.  You will find many places where the word fornication is used with different meanings.  If you read my post, you will see that there are many words that hold different meanings.  It depends on how it is used and when.  In the case spoken of concerning marriage, the word fornication means any sexual sin.

[A_Voice]

OneLight,

You are assuming that the exception clause, by its use of "fornication" means a sexual sin committed by the married wife. 

That means the exception clause provides partial allowance for the action which is the specific topic of discussion.

The specific topic under discussion is the normal post marital divorce since Matt 5:31 is referencing that kind of divorce.

You are saying that the exception clause then is also referring to the same kind of divorce, the normal post marital kind, allowing it to be done, but for a limited reason.

 

Did you know that when attempts are made to make any other sentence, on any other topic that conforms to the same format as Matt 5:31,32, that its exception clause NEVER provides partial allowance for the specific topic under discussion? It cannot be done.

Try it.

[kwikphilly]

Blessings.....

    I know this is a little off but it is important....

 

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

 It just seems to me that sometimes we can get so wrapped up on certain details that one can miss the very "heart" of  what Jesus wants us to understand very well and live our lives accordingly  ......perhaps that should be a cdifferent discussion on a new thread                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         With love-in Christ,Kwik

[A_Voice]

kwikphilly

 

If we are to avoid having adultery in our heart, how much more should we be concerned that we  do not commit it literally and physically? Yes, Jesus wants us to have pure hearts, and by his grace that is possible to keep unclean sexual thoughts out of our minds, but to actually be physically involved sexually with someone else's husband or wife, obviously that is a much greater sin.

So Christians should be aware how grievous the sin is of becoming remarried. It is adultery. Adulterers shall not inherit the kingdom of God. It is assumed that because civil authority makes it legal to divorce and remarry, then the Christian can do the same thing. Nope, dead wrong. It is adultery. The sex done in the second marriage is adultery against the first and lawful spouse who God has ordained to be part of the same body. Only death parts a lawful marriage. Remarriage is adultery.

Edited November 16, 2014 by A_Voice

[Guest]

Adultery is fornication

 

but not all fornication is adultery.

 

~

 

Beloved Really?

 

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Acts 17:11

 

All Adultery

 

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

 

Is Fornication

 

That they have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands, and with their idols have they committed adultery, and have also caused their sons, whom they bare unto me, to pass for them through the fire, to devour them. Ezekiel 23:37

 

Really

 

For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

 

Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods , and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice;

 

And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.

 

Thou shalt make thee no molten gods. Exodus 34:14-17

 

~

 

And Beloved, Is There

 

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16

 

No Hope?

 

And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, Revelation 1:5

 

Love, Your Brother Joe

[A_Voice]

Joe,

In Matt 15:9, Mark 7:21, 1 Cor 6:9 and Gal 5:19, we see forms of the words fornication and adultery listed side by side. This is beside in Matt 5:31,32 and 19:9 where they are in the same sentence. That is a total of 6 times in the NT where the word fornication is seen alongside the word adultery. There is definitely a difference between the two words.

A comparable other two words can be used to demonstrate how these kinds of pairs of words overlap in meaning but are not synonyms.

 

The words thieves and extortioners. They are both a form of theft so that it can be said, all extortion is theft but not all theft is extortion. So it is mind boggling how you could not understand that all adultery is fornication but not all fornication is adultery. I even gave you a sentence about Jane and John having committed fornication, not adultery.

Adultery is a specific type of sexual sin; one that violates a joined marriage. Extortion is a specific type of stealing, often the extortioner is in communication with his victim. This is not the done-unawares-behind-your-back kind of stealing. So while theft correctly describes more generally what extortion is, the word extortion itself identifies more precisely what king of theft it is.

The same with adultery. Adultery is fornication meaning it is unlawful sexual activity, but  the specific word adultery describes a particular kind of unlawful sexual activity; one that violates an existing marriage.

In Matt 5:27,28 Jesus is addressing the specific sin of adultery. So the topic is established, it is adultery, not fornication. We see fornication committed in the heart in Matt 15:19 and Mark 7:21. We also see the specific sexual sin, adultery in the heart, in the same two verses. Jesus is pinpointing the specific sexual sin of adultery in the heart in Matt 5:27,28. He is not pinpointing fornication in the heart.  Since adultery already has a clear definition then the adultery in the heart has to be done by a single man lusting after a married wife or a single woman lusting after a married husband or by two married people, but not married to each other, lusting after each other.