Dealt with in a post I just posted. Your point is silly....maybe I shouldn't say silly because it is grevious and can lead to adultery, error, breaking up families, causing havok in people's lives, harm relationships of individuals with God, cause all kinds of issues with childhood, lots of emotional pain, etc.
Look at Deuteronomy 24. Look at their question about Deuteronomy 24.
7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
So, first the writing of divorcement, and then sending away. Otherwise, they are not discussing the law of Moses.
'Put away' could also be rendered 'send away.' Do you think they divorced them, but then kept them around, ate with them, slept with them, etc. What would the point be of a man divorcing his wife if he wasn't trying to get rid of her?
I wonder if you have ben reading some garbage interpretations of those who seek to justify divorce for 'any cause' and make it out as if Jesus was only forbidding divorce if there was no certificate. Your terminology seems to align with stuff I have read along those lines. I understand the appeal of this teaching. There are lots of people who have gotten divorced completely contrary to the commands of Christ. Some of them confess their sin. But it might feel a lot more comfortable to reintepret scripture to fit behavior rather than conform behavior to fit the teaching of scripture. Also, giving oneself an out to marriage may be less stressful to some people. The apostles themselves responded to Jesus' teaching by saying, that if such be the case of a man with his wife, it is better for a man not to marry. That tells us that Jesus' teachings were not run-of-the-mill Pharisee teachings. They said that because Jesus' teachings were so restrictive on divorce that it made them uncomfortable.
I hope you agree with yourself. A woman with a certificate who was put away is put away.
There is a logical contradiction with what you wrote above. If the woman experienced both receiving the certificate and the putting away, she has been put away.
Okay, so we agree on that, but it seems like you are using the arguments and verbage of those who promote 'any cause' divorce among Christians, as long as the woman has a certificate. You made their arguments, minus their conclusion. There had to be two witnesses to stone an adulteress. This was not listed as a requirement for a divorce. So there were cases like this. More conservative Pharisees might have allowed it for 'unclean' situations short of full-blown intercourse, also.
I am not sure why that is relevant. Many previous centuries of European culture were a bit more in the direction of a 'caste-based' society. The egalitarian culture we have now took a long time to evolve into what it is now, and if Jesus tarries long enough, it will probably morph into something else, probably something less egalitarian. I do not see how that would change Jesus' teaching on marriage and divorce.
Look at Deuteronomy 24. Look at their question about Deuteronomy 24.
7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
So, first the writing of divorcement, and then sending away. Otherwise, they are not discussing the law of Moses.
'Put away' could also be rendered 'send away.' Do you think they divorced them, but then kept them around, ate with them, slept with them, etc. What would the point be of a man divorcing his wife if he wasn't trying to get rid of her?
I wonder if you have ben reading some garbage interpretations of those who seek to justify divorce for 'any cause' and make it out as if Jesus was only forbidding divorce if there was no certificate. Your terminology seems to align with stuff I have read along those lines. I understand the appeal of this teaching. There are lots of people who have gotten divorced completely contrary to the commands of Christ. Some of them confess their sin. But it might feel a lot more comfortable to reintepret scripture to fit behavior rather than conform behavior to fit the teaching of scripture. Also, giving oneself an out to marriage may be less stressful to some people. The apostles themselves responded to Jesus' teaching by saying, that if such be the case of a man with his wife, it is better for a man not to marry. That tells us that Jesus' teachings were not run-of-the-mill Pharisee teachings. They said that because Jesus' teachings were so restrictive on divorce that it made them uncomfortable.
I hope you agree with yourself. A woman with a certificate who was put away is put away.
There is a logical contradiction with what you wrote above. If the woman experienced both receiving the certificate and the putting away, she has been put away.
Okay, so we agree on that, but it seems like you are using the arguments and verbage of those who promote 'any cause' divorce among Christians, as long as the woman has a certificate. You made their arguments, minus their conclusion. There had to be two witnesses to stone an adulteress. This was not listed as a requirement for a divorce. So there were cases like this. More conservative Pharisees might have allowed it for 'unclean' situations short of full-blown intercourse, also.
I am not sure why that is relevant. Many previous centuries of European culture were a bit more in the direction of a 'caste-based' society. The egalitarian culture we have now took a long time to evolve into what it is now, and if Jesus tarries long enough, it will probably morph into something else, probably something less egalitarian. I do not see how that would change Jesus' teaching on marriage and divorce.
