วีดีโอ

Listen to the whole sermon. th-cam.com/users/livexhIjfMEYpto?si=JKrBCob8nwxIxXgd

@@brightangelchurchofchrist8145 I’ll check it out.

Amen

I have no idea 🤷

Is it one looking for answers and finding the truth.

Thank you for the comment. Jeremiah 3 is talking about Israel and Judah leaving God, not the marriage relationship. God uses the marriage relationship as an illustration of their idolatry and relationship with God, but to take an illustration and create a regulation about marriage and divorce is to do injustice to the text. God also used a similar illustration with Hosea. I do not agree with your assertion that fornication is not adultery and adultery is not fornication. Fornication is a broad category in which adultery is a sin within. Also within the category of fornication is homosexuality, beastieality, and incest. if you look at the way fornication is used in Paul’s letters, you understand it is a broad category of sexual sins, of which adultery is one. Finally, Jesus gives the exception in Matthew 19. To say that Jesus did not give it or it only applies to betrothal is to also do injustice to the text. Matthew is the word for betrothal in Matthew 1, he certainly could have used it here if Jesus meant betrothal. But He did not use that word. He used the word for marriage, and not only that, but Jesus doesn’t go to the Jewish betrothal as his argument, but to the beginning of creation with Adam and Eve. Not Jewish betrothal, but beginning of creation. So I won’t be amending what I teach as my understanding has not changed.

@@brightangelchurchofchrist8145 that is a response I expect of a hardened heart.

@@womanatwellworshiptheFather Why would you attack me rather than the argument? I gave you scriptures and logical arguments and rather than address that, you resort to name calling. Interesting.

@@brightangelchurchofchrist8145 not ONLY Jeremiah 3, but God models what He is saying through Hosea. To say that God's dealings with Israel have nothing to do with physical marriage is to deny that marriage is a TYPE of the Gospel which is clearly taught. Marriage is EXACTLY how Jesus deals with His Bride. There is ALSO A BETROTHAL STAGE. I did NOT say Jesus wasn't talking about MARRIAGE but He was talking about a STAGE OF MARRIAGE which the GENTILES do not have. The betrothal stage. He was saying EXCEPT FOR A CHARGE OF FORNICATION in the betrothal stage, a man can NOT divorce and remarry and whoever marries a DIVORCED person commits adultery. Both words are used because they mean TWO different things. A betrothed wife was STILL A WIFE. but if she committed sexual acts, it was FORNICATION. if after the TIME THE GROOM could repudiate her for a charge of FORNICATION passed...after the time she presented her virginity tokens, then any sexual act not with her husband was considered adultery. GENTILES have no fornication clause. Also THIS CHARGE could not apply to widows ..as there would be no EXPECTATION of virginity

@@brightangelchurchofchrist8145 i gave scripture back. See Jesus said they were NEVER AGAIN two people on earth. They became ONE. Adultery does Not Sever the Covenant or else the woman in Rom 7:2-3 would NOT be an adulteress. Notice she is not committing porneia but adultery. It is because she IS PAST the point of betrothal marriage. As we wait on Jesus Christ, our Groom, we are to keep ourselves PURE AND UNDEFILED so we will not get dismissed from Him for porneia.

1 Corinthians 7:10 -11 is the same teaching as Matthew 19. A wife is not to divorce her husband, but if she does she is to "remain unmarried" or "be reconciled to her husband". There is no authority to marry someone else. Not sure I understand the second part of the question about how God would see each person under the flesh after divorce. Can you clarify?

@@ShadowR-jz2cw I guess my confusion is the idea that “God sees” the marriage as one flesh. The Bible doesn’t say that God sees the marriage as one flesh, it says the two become one flesh, and then Jesus says, “what God has joined together, let no man separate” (Matthew 19:6). That means man does not have the authority to separate what God had joined together. So any subsequent marriage to another would be adultery. If man were to separate a marriage God had joined together (accept for sexual immortality), the only approved options are to remained unmarried or rejoin the marriage that God joined together (1 Corinthians 7:10-11). If a marriage is separated because of sexual immorality, God has authorized the separation for the innocent party, and that party has the authority of God to be married to another eligible mate. If both are eligible to be married, the two become one flesh.

Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, I’m not sure what your point is.

I’m not sure I can give you a straight forward answer and this is my opinion. I believe it would depend on the situation. I know of some couples who have severed the marriage relationship, but for some other reason (financial mostly) have not divorced from the state. But they are not husband and wife. I believe that would be acceptable based on Matthew 19, but again that is my opinion and each person must evaluate their situation and know they will have to answer to God for their actions.

Thank you.

Instead of using ad hominem arguments why don't you watch the video. It seems you did not watch it as evidence was presented in the video.

@@brightangelchurchofchrist8145 So,... *nothing,* then? *Nothing* distinguishable from wishful-thinking? Yeah, that's what I figured. You said that evidence was presented in the video. Where? How about a time-stamp? I didn't watch the video (I started it, but he was just preaching to the choir), but I read the transcript. Well, I even gave up on _that_ after awhile, but I made it more than halfway through. Sorry, but he wasn't getting anywhere. And my time has _some_ value. If you've actually _got_ something, then why not present *one specific example?* Why not present *one piece of good evidence,* specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge it for myself? Why is *one* too much to ask? And you don't even have to type it out. Just give me the time-stamp and I'll check the transcript. Assuming your claim is actually _true._ Again, you need to provide your evidence to biologists, if you actually have any. Convince biologists that the worldwide scientific consensus is wrong, and you'll change my mind about biology, too. But at least I'll be able to take your claims _seriously_ if you have something, rather than nothing. After all, evidence is how we distinguish reality from delusion and wishful-thinking. What, do you have so many commenters here that you don't have time to reply to every one? :) PS. I don't think you know what an 'ad hominem argument" is. You might google it. Just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.