₦airaland Forum

oziezu:
∆ At least, educate the members with biblical reference to support your position.

There are no restrictions for divorce. Rather, adultery is grounds for remarriage - Matthew 19 - and this is according to Jesus Christ. .

oziezu:
At least, educate the members with biblical reference to support your position.

I did in my subsequent replies to him.

My Friend, I understand the perspective the original writer is coming from... Next time try not to make it an authority in an article where the research was not done by you because literally you can't defend it.

Perhaps, that theology or believe system is the foundational doctrine of the Catholic faith, which probably, you are a believer of Catholic Church doctrines.

We live in a world of vast increase in knowledge! Arguments in this era is very obsolete if you must win peoples heart towards your opinion - always make your point very objective in content and character !

Note: just like you authoritatively fault other bible interpretation, they also have the audacity to fault yours too!

You have not been able to answer why Abram & Co committed Incest and even your own bible version did not rebuke them, yet your same version had to put a final authority on Incest as the only reason for divorce among others.

Looking at church history, there has always been conflict whenever a new movement is about to breakaway; Catholic - Protestant - Methodist - Authodox - Baptist - Apostolic - Episcopal - Adventist - Assemblies - Evangelical - Pentecostal - and presently the one being lead by one Abel Damina - had fault with previous!

So many versions of the bible comes as a result of ideology, believe system that gives birth to denominational doctrines.

The interpretation and re-interpretation of scriptures did not start today, it existed since the era of Abram, Moses and Jesus. You could see from the bible, when Jesus tried to put a clearer meaning of the scriptures to the Elders, it brought alot of conflicting believes.

For Ages, Bible interpretation always makes alot of conflict. This subject matter seniors you! Don't try to put yourself or the doctrine you believe as a final authority. If what you practice as a Christian is giving you result, giving Glory to God continue in them. I think God is not a one way traffic, rigid.

STYCNig:
My Friend, I understand the perspective the original writer is coming from... Next time try not to make it an authority in an article where the research was not done by you because literally you can't defend it.
Perhaps, that theology or believe system is the foundational doctrine of the Catholic faith, which probably, you are a believer of Catholic Church doctrines.
We live in a world of vast increase in knowledge! Arguments in this era is very obsolete if you must win peoples heart towards your opinion - always make your point very objective in content and character !

Note: just like you authoritatively fault other bible interpretation, they also have the audacity to fault yours too!

You have not been able to answer why Abram & Co committed Incest and even your own bible version did not rebuke them, yet your same version had to put a final authority on Incest as the only reason for divorce among others.

Looking at church history, there has always been conflict whenever a new movement is about to breakaway; Catholic - Protestant - Methodist - Authodox - Baptist - Apostolic - Episcopal - Adventist - Assemblies - Evangelical - Pentecostal - and presently the one being lead by one Abel Damina - had fault with previous!
So many versions of the bible comes as a result of ideology, believe system that gives birth to denominational doctrines.
The interpretation and re-interpretation of scriptures did not start today, it existed since the era of Abram, Moses and Jesus. You could see from the bible, when Jesus tried to put a clearer meaning of the scriptures to the Elders, it brought alot of conflicting believes.
For Ages, Bible interpretation always makes alot of conflict. This subject matter seniors you! Don't try to put yourself or the doctrine you believe as a final authority. If what you practice as a Christian is giving you result, giving Glory to God continue in them. I think God is not a one way traffic, rigid.

Christianity as a religion boasts of well over 47,000 denominations/cults/sects, founded on doctrines and traditions that differ in various ways from the root teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ in His Kingdom of God. For instance, Jesus Christ said He does not receive praises or glory from men yet Christians believe they have power and ability to give glory to the very same Jesus Christ. So, how anyone can expect that which is detached from God --- lies -- to at the same time benefit and even be of God's Truth is beyond me.

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

This writer and Reno Omokri are the same
Twisting the Bible to fit their freaking narratives.
Dey play

immortalcrown:
©Fr Kelvin Ugwu

Foolish Argument!

Kobojunkie:
Take on Christianity? For Pete's sake, Jesus Christ disavowed religious leaders and even religion beginning with the one that existed during His time. Christianity which is modelled after Judaism is equally of the antichrist explaining why most of what you lot believe conflict with that decreed by Jesus Christ as far as His own Kingdom.

Girl, go away.

Fulgur:
Girl, go away.

Again, a take on Christianity? For Pete's sake, Jesus Christ disavowed religious leaders and even religion beginning with the one that existed during His time. Christianity, which is modeled after Judaism, is of the antichrist explaining why most of what you lot believe conflicts with that decreed by Jesus Christ as far as His own Kingdom.

Kobojunkie:
Again, a take on Christianity? For Pete's sake, Jesus Christ disavowed religious leaders and even religion beginning with the one that existed during His time. Christianity, which is modeled after Judaism, is of the antichrist explaining why most of what you lot believe conflicts with that decreed by Jesus Christ as far as His own Kingdom.

Ok

Women!
The real problem of the world...

My personal experience: I married a woman out of pressure that I impregnated her, she was from a pagan home. My siblings that encourage the marriage formed part of the discord that ensues later in the marriage.

My first observation is poor home training and lack of proper upbringing. It was a catastrophic marriage frauted with violence and insults and till date I don't relate with some of my kindred that were party to the marriage.

She packed her stuff before I came back home from work one day, lots of drama afterwards..

The instances of adultery was never foremost cos I didn't catch her in the act but there are several hints that she was sleeping with other men and colluding with outsiders against me most times, also there was the spiritual angle to subdue me so I could be rendered indecisive.

These are real experience of marrying into a wrong family and ppl who achieve their aims through diabolical means.

Today am happily married to another woman and doing well although after lots of prayers and battles to severe myself from the other woman.

I haven't divorced her yet but I have made some legal plans to nullify her existence in my affairs either in my time or after.

This is to clarify that divorce isn't biblical but u can separate from darkness and unholy alliances one may make in ignorance or wilfully.

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

This is nonsense