ALLNIGERIANSMAD:
that your Long post is for what exactly? You need to be arrested and detained for talking too much

This is your response because you cannot find any falsehood in the comment and you are not willing to accept the truth.

immortalcrown:
Then, avoid using the Bible to institute your marriage.

Bros you just dey shout incest since. Please make me understand something; let's say after church wedding, the husband true colour now shows and turn his wife to punching bag; what should the woman do? Even after the elders in the church intervene severally.

Magnumproperty:

Bros you just dey shout incest since. Please make me understand something; let's say after church wedding, the husband true colour now shows and turn his wife to punching bag; what should the woman do? Even after the elders in the church intervene severally.

Every human has the tendency to be a partner beater. Have it in mind when you decide to say, "For better for worse until death do us part".

immortalcrown:
Serial killer means he has killed many people before wanting to marry her.

Did she know it before getting married to him? If yes, she should carry her cross. If no, the union is not marriage, meaning she is free to walk out of the marriage. Walking out of the marriage in this scenario is annulment, not divorce.

You can't be taken seriously. Just look at the cynical ease with which you shift gears, change the goal posts, redefine things to suit yourself.

1. Since when must it be the case that his serial killing occurred before wanting to marry her? Why can it not be something that either starts or persists post marriage? Kindly note that this remains an example. It stands representative for any number of similar scenarios.

2. Since when is it the case that any sin you are unaware of in your spouse's life is grounds for annulment? If that were the case every single marriage in history has grounds for annulment. Because there is no way anyone can know all the sins of anyone else.

Please stop making stuff up as you go along. That only reveals a lack of integrity and honesty. If you were sincere you will simple admit there are several reasonable grounds for divorce.

Please note, in the modern era, domestic violence is a big issue. You must be both insensitive and irresponsible if you advise anyone to remain in a marriage ridden with domestic violence, for example.

Hardtalk:
So, even the rich also cry.

Na wah ooooo.

I remember when this man was apostle of married and singles. Hardly a campuse existed that he didn't visit. He showcased his marriage as the best, even as his wife was five years older.

My advice is that, no perfect marriage anywhere. Let us all make our marriages work. Even marriage counsellors are not angels. They too need help.

DeepSight:


You can't be taken seriously. Just look at the cynical ease with which you shift gears, change the goal posts, redefine things to suit yourself.

1. Since when must it be the case that his serial killing occurred before wanting to marry her? Why can it not be something that either starts or persists post marriage? Kindly note that this remains an example. It stands representative for any number of similar scenarios.

2. Since when is it the case that any sin you are unaware of in your spouse's life is grounds for annulment? If that were the case every single marriage in history has grounds for annulment. Because there is no way anyone can know all anyone's else sins.

Please stop making stuff up as you go along. That only reveals a lack of integrity and honesty. If you were sincere you will simple admit there are several reasonable grounds for divorce.

Please note, in the modern era, domestic violence is a big issue. You must be both insensitive and irresponsible if you advise anyone to remain in a marriage ridden with domestic violence, for example.

If you deceive your prospective spouse on certain (serious) things before and during your church wedding, the marriage is invalid. If a serial killer hides it from his or her yet-to-be spouse and the act is revealed after the person's wedding with the spouse, the wedding is invalid.

Secondly, you are saying "modern era" as if the Bible has changed for the modern era.

immortalcrown:
If you deceive your prospective spouse on certain (serious) things before and during your church wedding, the marriage is invalid. If a serial killer hides it from his or her yet-to-be spouse and the act is revealed after the person's wedding with the spouse, the wedding is invalid.

I asked you if it is not possible that such conduct commenced after the marriage: thus there was no deceit.

Look, I am just trying to force you the see the obvious: namely that there are an infinity of different scenarios which are thrown up in reality. And thus you cannot limit things the way you are attempting to.

Simple question: your spouse becomes a serial killer post marriage. Must you remain there/ Second - Your spouse abuses you by physically attacking you regularly. Must you remain there?

axglide:
Isn’t this the video where he said divorce is not a sin? And he used Kenneth Copeland marrying 3 times to justify what he’s saying? He also used the Meyer’s too?

Sir Olumide, the Word of God is our standard not men’s experiences.

Sorry about the abuse you had to go through thou.

It's not a sin. Even Jesus made it known that it is the permissive will of God

immortalcrown:
Serial killer means he has killed many people before wanting to marry her.

Did she know it before getting married to him? If yes, she should carry her cross. If no, the union is not marriage, meaning she is free to walk out of the marriage. Walking out of the marriage in this scenario is annulment, not divorce.

Ibiakwa, which one is annulment again?

DeepSight:


I asked you if it is not possible that such conduct commenced after the marriage: thus there was no deceit.

Look, I am just trying to force you the see the obvious: namely that there are an infinity of different scenarios which are thrown up in reality. And thus you cannot limit things the way you are attempting to.

Simple question: your spouse becomes a serial killer post marriage. Must you remain there/ Second - Your spouse abuses you by physically attacking you regularly. Must you remain there?

"For better for worse until death do us part" covers for future uncertainties. If the person was not a serial killer before the church wedding but he or she became a serial killer after the wedding, it is sinful to divorce the person.

If you want to follow Christ, be ready to carry your cross. If you are not sure you can carry the cross, don't deceive yourself by claiming you are following Jesus Christ.

Danger of a single story..,Pastor Olumide Emmanuel don talk him own wetun him wife do, in all these, he didnt do anything
It takes two to tango. Oya the ex wife should grant her own interview too with Chude, let us have better perspective & weigh in on the matter

Oga pastor, so you mean you were receiving gbas gbos from your wife all these years you were married to her


Chai! Fear this evil gender!

rezzy:
Ibiakwa, which one is annulment again?

Annulment is when an intended marriage fails for not meeting all the necessary requirements for the institutionalisation of the marriage.

immortalcrown:
"For better for worse until death do us part" covers for future uncertainties. If the person was not a serial killer before the church wedding but he or she became a serial killer after the wedding, it is sinful to divorce the person.

If you want to follow Christ, be ready to carry your cross. If you are not sure you can carry the cross, don't deceive yourself by claiming you are following Jesus Christ.

Me? Sorry I am not a Christian, perhaps I should have mentioned.
But I have no doubt that Christ would never subscribe to anything so rigid, so abominable, so irresponsible and so disgusting as what you have just presented.

Maybe you will change your mind if you have a daughter who finds herself in that scenario, heaven forbid though.

immortalcrown:
"For better for worse until death do us part" covers for future uncertainties. If the person was not a serial killer before the church wedding but he or she became a serial killer after the wedding, it is sinful to divorce the person.

If you want to follow Christ, be ready to carry your cross. If you are not sure you can carry the cross, don't deceive yourself by claiming you are following Jesus Christ.

I was taking you serious before

With this post, not anymore

DeepSight:
Me? Sorry I am not a Christian, perhaps I should have mentioned.
But I have no doubt that Christ would never subscribe to anything so rigid, so abominable, so irresponsible and so disgusting as what you have just presented.

Read the Bible to confirm it.

That marriage is null and void, when a partner becomes a beater. Still death do us apart does not mean anyone should become a punching bag.

immortalcrown:
Every human has the tendency to be a partner beater. Have it in mind when you decide to say, "For better for worse until death do us part".

SeriouslySense:
That marriage is null and void, one a partner become a beater.

This is true, depending on the traditional foundation of that very marriage.

immortalcrown:
Your sentiment reduces your brain functionality. I made it clear in the comment that incest being the acceptable reason for divorce applies to Christians.

You Missed The Whole Point. Sorry.

Your Frequency Is No Match.

Even Church wedding does not mean any partner, should have the right to treat another like a punching bag or like something to use to satisfy their frustrations or twisted desires.

immortalcrown:
This is true, depending on the traditional foundation of that very marriage.

immortalcrown:
Read the Bible to confirm it.

Especially as member of the Roman Cult, you should know that the Bible is not the be-all and end-all.

SeriouslySense:
Even Church wedding does not mean any partner, should have the right to treat another like a punching bag or like something to use to satisfy their frustrations.

I never said the church wedding gives anyone the right to be abusive. The point is that church wedding has its disadvantages and its advantages. Church wedding commands people to endure so many unpleasant situations if those situations occur in the marriage.

DeepSight:
Especially as member of the Roman Cult, you should know that the Bible is not the be-all and end-all.

You don't accept the Bible but you are involving yourself in the affairs of the Bible. Keep deceiving yourself.

immortalcrown:
You don't accept the Bible but you are involving yourself in the affairs of the Bible. Keep deceiving yourself.

Marriage and divorce are not exclusively biblical matters. They are human matters which have existed long before your Cult put together the Bible.

DeepSight:
Marriage and divorce are not exclusively biblical matters. They are human matters which have existed long before your Cult put together the Bible.

Different groups of people have different beliefs they use to handle every human matter.

Some use their culture to handle marriage. Some use their country's constitution to handle marriage. Some use Bible to handle marriage. Must everyone follow your own way?

immortalcrown:
Different groups of people have different beliefs they use to handle every human matter.

Some use their culture to handle marriage. Some use their country's constitution to handle marriage. Some use Bible to handle marriage. Must everyone follow your own way?

And if its the Bible, the Bible plainly permits divorce in at least one particular instance.

DeepSight:
And if its the Bible, the Bible plainly permits divorce in at least one particular instance.

That instance is incest.

immortalcrown:
That instance is incest.

It says no such thing. You are writing your own scripture.

All of Una no get ankali

DeepSight:
It says no such thing. You are writing your own scripture.

Prove that I am writing my own scripture.

Yes enduring because it models the Relationship God has with us, but if one is getting insane because of marriage, then it is time to quit.

immortalcrown:
I never said the church wedding gives anyone the right to be abusive. The point is that church wedding has its disadvantages and its advantages. Church wedding commands people to endure so many unpleasant situations if those situations occur in the marriage.

Let me ask a question that I know the answer.

Did you watch the video?

We know you didn't.

So what is the basis of this long epistle.

immortalcrown:
Only incest is biblically acceptable for a divorce. But many people claim that the Bible permits divorce if adultery happens. Some people claim that the Bible supports divorce if any form of unfaithfulness occurs in the marriage.

If incest is not the biblical ground for a divorce, why did the disciples of Jesus Christ say what they said in Mathew 19:10? Read the chapter and pay attention to the verse 10. Then, tell me why the disciples made the statement.

The problem here is hypocrisy. People want to be here and there. People want to eat their cake and have it.

If you want to divorce your spouse when he or she offends you, avoid church wedding. Do your traditional marriage or any other form of marriage. The issue is that people want church wedding but don't want the cross that comes with church wedding. Church wedding vow says, "... until death do us part". Nobody is forcing you to choose the bible type of marriage. But if you willingly choose it and fail to maintain it, you are deceiving yourself.

Choose a tradition you can maintain. Don't deceive yourself with church wedding when you are not willing to abide by its principles.

Many people are quoting me. Before you argue with me, read the article below. 👇🏽

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/YsuRQDEXyRcf4Xv9/?mibextid=oFDknk

Is Divorce a Sin?

I think the right question should be, did Jesus Permit divorce? Did God permit divorce? In other words, are you even allowed to divorce before you start talking about whether it is a sin or not?

The straight answer is that Jesus never permitted divorce. Once marriage is validly contracted, even adultery as some of you wrongly allege is not a ground for divorce.

I know this whole misunderstanding is coming from Jesus' statement in Matthew 19:9. I will clarify it. But before then, I am not writing this to give people a license to cheat on their spouses. As a matter of fact, you owe your spouse fidelity and faithfulness. It is their right. You are not doing them a favor by being faithful.

Back to Matthew 19:9 where it seemed Jesus gave an exception for divorce:

"Whoever divorces his wife except for unchastity and marries another commits adultery."

The exceptive clause, "EXCEPT FOR UNCHASTITY" is the major issue here. Simply put, unchastity is a good reason to divorce one's spouse.

You may want to ask, what constitutes 'unchastity?' We shall get to know soon.

We all remember that the New Testament was originally written in Greek bah?

The Greek word for unchastity is "PORNEIA." The Protestants argue that this Greek word "porneia" means adultery. This is why if you read the Protestant New International Version of the Bible, Matthew 19:9 is translated thus:

"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, EXCEPT FOR MARITAL UNFAITHFULNESS, and marries another woman commits adultery."

For most Protestants, though marriage is meant to last a lifetime, but adultery justifies divorce and remarriage. This is because they interpreted the Greek word "porneia" or "unchastity" as adultery.

This is not true. And this is not Catholic teaching.

Catholic biblical scholars believe that it is wrong to translate the Greek word "porneia" as adultery. In the Catholic New American Bible, Matthew 19:9 is translated thus:

"I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery."

Here, the exceptive clause is: "UNLAWFUL MARRIAGE."

If you read the King James Version of the Bible, the translation for PORNEIA is even more interesting. It translates Matthew 19:9 thus:

"And I say unto you, whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for FORNICATION, and shall marry another committeth adultery."

Here, the exceptive clause is Fornication. And fornication is the sin of two unmarried people having sexual intercourse. If either person is married or both are married to other people, the sin is called adultery. Following this translation, the only way that a couple could commit fornication is if they were never really in a Christian marriage to begin with.

Many recent translations of porneia in Matt 19:9 used "sexual immoralities." That still begs the question of what sexual immoralities could mean.

In all these, what really is the correct translation for the word PORNEIA? Is it the Protestants' "adultery", the King James' "fornication", or the Catholics' "Unlawful marriage"? Even if porneia is to be seen as unchastity or sexual immoralities, what constitutes unchastity?

The answer to the above questions can be better clarified using the bible. I will give you two examples: Matthew 15:19 and Mark 7:21-22.

Matthew 15:19 "For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, ADULTERY, UNCHASTITY, theft, false witness, blasphemy."

Mark 7:21-22, "From within people, from their hearts, come evil thoughts, UNCHASTITY, theft, murder, ADULTERY, greed, malice, deceit, licentiousness, envy, blasphemy, arrogance, folly."

Pay attention to this: Adultery and unchastity are both prohibited in the texts above. If you read the Greek text, it is "porneia" that is translated as unchastity, in some bible it is translated as sexual immorality. While the Greek word "moicheia" is translated as adultery. Therefore, from these passages, we can see that porneia does not mean adultery as that would be an unnecessary repetition.

The word for adultery in Greek is 'moicheia.' If the author of Matthew 19:9 felt that Christ was talking about adultery, he wouldn't have used 'porneia' which means unchastity.

This is Matthew 19:9 in its original Greek

λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν ὅτι ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μὴ ἐπὶ ΠΟΡΝΕΊΑΙ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην, ΜΟΙΧΑ͂ΤΑΙ.

I have put into capital letters two words:
πορνείᾳ (porneia) and μοιχᾶται (moichatai — verb form)

If the Bible intended that adultery is a ground for divorce, the two words would have been moicheia. And it will read thus: "I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for ADULTERY, and marries another woman commits ADULTERY."

But fortunately or unfortunately, that is not how it was written in the Bible.

If you read Act 15:28-29, the Apostles addressed the Gentiles prohibiting four things:

"For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain (1) from what has been sacrificed to idols, and (2) from blood and (3) from what is strangled and (4) from unchastity. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell." RSV (inserted numbers, mine)

Take note of the number (4), still talking about Porneia or Unchastity. These four prohibitions above came from a deep-rooted Jewish tradition found in Leviticus 17 and 18.

If you read Leviticus through, you will discover that in chapter 18, what the Jews mean by unchastity or Porneia was explicitly explained. It was simply an incestuous marriage. Having sexual intercourse with a close relative was greatly forbidden, not to talk of marriage. For the Jews, marriage of this nature is unlawful. This was what Christ was referring to in Matthew 19:9. It is a reference to an unlawful and thus invalid marriage. It is not a reference, as Protestants view it, to a specific act committed during a legitimate "life-long marriage.

Jesus' teaching on divorce was revolutionary. Remember that it was to answer the Jews who thought that one could divorce his wife for some reasons that made Jesus to give the answer he gave. If Jesus permitted divorce, what then makes his teaching different from the one Moses taught the Jews in the OT?

If Christ's teaching on divorce was that simple, how can one explain the surprise that surrounded the disciples when they responded in the next verse?

Matthew 19: 10, "(His) disciples said to him, 'If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.'"

©Fr Kelvin Ugwu