divorce and remarriage?

[Grailhunter]

"8If a case is too difficult for you to judge, whether the controversy within your gates is regarding bloodshed, lawsuits, or assaults, you must go up to the place the LORD your God will choose. 9You are to go to the Levitical priests and to the judge who presides at that time. Inquire of them, and they will give you a verdict in the case.10You must abide by the verdict they give you at the place the LORD will choose. Be careful to do everything they instruct you, 11according to the terms of law they give and the verdict they proclaim. Do not turn aside to the right or to the left from the decision they declare to you." Deuteronomy 17:8-11

2“The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3So practice and observe everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4They tie up heavy, burdensome loadsa and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them." Matthew 23:2-4​

It is these binding rabbinical judgments that Christ in this New Covenant set the people of God free from.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:18-19

But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for a single stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. Luke 16:17
And you might be interested in this....
“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery. Luke 16:18

 

[Grailhunter]

"16After this letter has been read among you, make sure that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans, and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea." Colossians 4:16

This is actually my point....people were told what to believe and do. That was what the letters were for.

"Some parts of his (Paul's) letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort,h as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:16 Onesimus (Philemon 1:10) collected all of Paul's writings. Which, as you know, eventually ended up in our Bibles.

Not sure of your point.
I will just say this....if you think that Paul thought he was writing scriptures....you are wrong. He is responding to letters from churches....which is very important to understand....we are reading one side of a conversation which makes misunderstandings very possible. Epistles are another matter. Try it here on this forum, only read one side of the conversation.

Most of the time in the New Testament when they are referring to scriptures, they are referring to the Old Testament.

And the word Bible does not appear in the scriptures.

 

[lilygrace]

a person had stated this thread has been started a few other times. well im sorry then. i havent seen one. or i could have added to it.

i feel so welcome.

 

[Grailhunter]

@Mayflower @Hidden In Him @Grailhunter @lilygrace

Thanks for sharing, Nancy.

I do wonder if some of that indoctrination is from how society try to make homosexuality acceptable through the media whereas someone being unfaithful to the spouse is still frowned upon.

Yet in church and among Christians, the issue of divorce & marrying a divorced person and the unvoiced consequence from Jesus's words thereof is avoided.

My former church considered it a can of worms as I reckon some would fall under that category.

One of the senior pastors that had gone through my former church, had preached that it was not an unforgiveable sin to get a divorce to rationalize it to the congregation when certain popular members were presently involved in going through the process. I was upset that the preacher was giving grace for Christians to commit sin. I almost wanted to yell from the balcony "Is it an unforgiveable sin to commit murder?!" just to make a point that we are not to use God's grace to commit sin, but I knew that the sermon was directed to me & the silence from the congregation, even from the elders, just convinced me that there was no point when no one hears His words, they will not hear mine.

It was one thing if a couple had divorced and remarried already, but preaching using God's grace to go ahead and commit sin? This same pastor insisted that the young couple go through series of counseling before he agreed to marry them but not before getting a divorce? Made me wonder why he even bothered with insisting on the counseling before marriage.

Fundamentalism....bible only was something that had to happen some 1500 years after Christ's ministry. But by method it has caused its own problems. By human ruling, God does not have the authority to make corrections or additions to the Bible.
There was a lot going on with Christ's conversation with the Jews about divorce and marriage and Christians read Jewish Law and customs into their religious beliefs. Paul address this but it is not all that detailed. Much better to get a divorce than to commit adultery and or death do you part....bang!....in a gun cleaning accident.

 

[Grailhunter]

@Hidden In Him @Nancy @Mayflower @lilygrace



1 Timothy 3:2 should say something against polygamy being practiced still. One could say that what Peter was talking about in wresting Paul's words to their own destruction in ( 2 Peter 3:15-17 ) Peter may be referring to that verse 28 of 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 where sin was no longer sin to believers for why the apostle John had to write the Book of 1 John.

So polygamy may have been practiced in Christianity by those drawn away by the error of the wicked.

This is one of the issues that Christianity has with understanding the Bible. As I keep saying you cannot read the scriptures like they are the latest edition of the local Sunday Paper. Context! Context!

Cover to cover....Polygamy and concubinage was never a sin. Nor was it a sin for a father to sell his daughter as concubine...a sex slave.. Nor was it a sin for a father to receive profit for his daughter to marry a man that may or may not of been her choice. And the father was to deliver a virgin daughter and if she was not, her new husband could kill her and deliver her to his doorstep. Nor was slavery a sin. Nor was taking a wife through the union of sex. This is all Mosaic Law and the Christians adopted these practices for a long time after the biblical era. No sin.

But I say we were taught higher morals by the Holy Spirit...if you have another explaination......?
No biblical requirement for wedding ceremonies....only the union. More to it than that....but in the 1500's the Protestants decided to make it a rule....you had to have a ceremony to be married....love weddings!

 

[Grailhunter]

Do not have sex with someone you are not married to.

You might think I am more "holy or right" if I would agree with you. But I have a reputation for being a straight shooter...so...In most cases no matter how religious people are....it is not going to happen that way anyway.

It gets a little sticky....LOL....but sticky is good.
Of course the Bible is not a romance guide and your statement....Do not have sex with someone you are not married to....is not biblical....you had to have sex to be married. And sex is a broad term.
In the Bible compatibility was not a concern. This is funny, even conversations were an option. Compatibility was not a concern...a husband ruled over his wife....just as the curse of Eve said....If he wanted sex...he took his wife and her preferences may not be his concern.

Now a days I hope most Christian men have more respect for a woman that is a romantic interest or his wife.
But sexual compatibility is just one the elements of compatibles that need to be established. And as far as kissing and petting there are ways to establish sexual compatibility without coupling.

 

[Christ4Me]

Fundamentalism....bible only was something that had to happen some 1500 years after Christ's ministry.

Not really. John 14:23-24 & John 15:20 & 2 Timothy 3:13-17 Note books & parchments in 2 Timothy 4:13 And how Paul indirectly testified to the Book of Revelation and the apostle John's visit to the third heaven in 2 Corinthians 12:1-4

They were even to share the epistles with other churches, making copies. Colossians 4:16 1 Thessalonians 5:27

Peter acknowledge Paul's writing on par as scripture; 2 Peter 3:15-16

But by method it has caused its own problems. By human ruling, God does not have the authority to make corrections or additions to the Bible. There was a lot going on with Christ's conversation with the Jews about divorce and marriage and Christians read Jewish Law and customs into their religious beliefs. Paul address this but it is not all that detailed. Much better to get a divorce than to commit adultery and or death do you part....bang!....in a gun cleaning accident.

Matthew 19:3-12 Other scripture does give the option of a separation, even if it becomes permanent, rather than a divorce.

We cannot undo the past. If regrets or anger resurfaces, give it to Jesus at that throne of grace. Hebrews 4:12-16 & then just go forward with Him

Philippians 3:13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, 14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. 15 Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

Ephesians 4:23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. 25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. 26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: 27 Neither give place to the devil. 28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. 29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. 30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. 31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: 32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

Easier said than done, but with Jesus Christ in me, my hope is in Him to help me to do this daily in forgetting the wrongs done to me in the past by forgiving them, and to look forward to leaving this life and this world when the Bridegroom comes.

 

[Grailhunter]

@Hidden In Him @Nancy @Mayflower @lilygrace



1 Corinthians 7:1-2 pretty much rules out fornication whereas 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 says to marry to avoid burning and hence fornication.

Lust is not love and love is not lust. Paul exhorts believers in this wise forewarning them too.

Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

I have heard fornicators say when one proposes marriage to the other after the first time, the other says it doesn't mean anything when referring to what they had done in fornication. Media tells the truth that it is just chemicals and hormones and has nothing to do with love. Indeed, I wondered a person speaking " I love you" is really meaning to say "I love your body" or "I love sex". Thus not having any real love for that person.

Indeed, for a Christian being concerned about the other Christian abiding state in the Lord & not just their own, they would love that believer by leaning on the Lord for His help so as to not want to have sex with the person they love.

But if they cannot contain, get married, even elope to avoid fornication & then have the public marriage later on if need be for the familes that want to join in the celebation of their marriage together.



Sorry that had happened to you & to your mother.

If you have a Bible with the word fornication in it....throw it away! The words fornicate, fornicator, or fornication does not appear in the Bible. They are words that have definitions that occurred many centuries after the Bible and then inserted in the translation to interject a meaning of men.

Galatians 5:19 is great
Then there is also

1st Corinthians 6:9-10 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Galatians 5:19-21 “Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

Revelation 21:8
But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

2Cor:5:10: For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Now these scriptures are written in the "absolute" as in no mention of forgiveness possible.....And there are Protestants that believe that after Baptism, no sin can be forgiven. And there are Christians that see romance in itself as a sin and lust. There are people that think that everything that occurs before a marriage is a sin.
That two people that find each other attractive is lust....love in itself is a sin....that the love of a woman takes away from the love of God....the desire they have to kiss... touch.... caress...see naked.... to join, is lust, a sin....and of the devil!

But problem with that....from start to finish this was designed by God.....Be fruitful and multiply was the only commandment He kept reiterating as significant events and His most repeated promise....your descendants will be like the stars in the sky....the sand of the shores....the dust of the earth....LOL...You know what it takes to cause that to happen....a whole bunch of begetting!

The devil was not even consulted on this process.....and if this process and desire was not in place, in a pressing manner, the grass would be growing and no one to mow it. The women would have went off gathering and the men would have lived in lean-to and sat by the river fishing and drinking wine with no interest in each other. LOL the Birds and the Bees.....

Our responsibility.....our love....our respect for God and for ourselves and our person of interest and our love is not to act like animals.....!

God created this sequence and it is in itself demands respect....and thoughtful progression. If you love a woman the memory of that first union should be right...respectful...and beautiful.
Yes I am a hopeless romantic....guilty as charged!

 

[Christ4Me]

This is one of the issues that Christianity has with understanding the Bible. As I keep saying you cannot read the scriptures like they are the latest edition of the local Sunday Paper. Context! Context!

Cover to cover....Polygamy and concubinage was never a sin. Nor was it a sin for a father to sell his daughter as concubine...a sex slave.. Nor was it a sin for a father to receive profit for his daughter to marry a man that may or may not of been her choice. And the father was to deliver a virgin daughter and if she was not, her new husband could kill her and deliver her to his doorstep. Nor was slavery a sin. Nor was taking a wife through the union of sex. This is all Mosaic Law and the Christians adopted these practices for a long time after the biblical era. No sin.

But I say we were taught higher morals by the Holy Spirit...if you have another explaination......?
No biblical requirement for wedding ceremonies....only the union. More to it than that....but in the 1500's the Protestants decided to make it a rule....you had to have a ceremony to be married....love weddings!

I disagree, brother. Matthew 19:3-12 again. Jesus always refers to the first marriage to set the boundary of marriage.

The Holy Spirit uses Jesus's words for reminding us, correcting us, guiding us, and teaching us; John 14:26

From the onset, God warned the future people of Israel and their future kings against polygamy.

Deuteronomy 17:14 When thou art come unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; 15 Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother. 16 But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. 17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. 18 And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: 19 And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: 20 That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.

We have seen how Israel down through the history did not always listen to God, but every now and then, when God had enough as their iniquities piled high, the nation was punished, then they repented, and restored, fell away again, punished. A repeat cycle as backsliding Israel.

So just because there were backsliding Jews & Christians in early history, that does not mean God really permitted it in the first place. Almost the same as Moses giving a writ of divorce for any thing because of the hardness of their hearts and so the same can be said for permitting polygamy.

Any doubt can be done away by hearing Jesus words about marriage; one man & one woman as one flesh; no man nor woman may separate.

 

[Christ4Me]

If you have a Bible with the word fornication in it....throw it away! The words fornicate, fornicator, or fornication does not appear in the Bible. They are words that have definitions that occurred many centuries after the Bible and then inserted in the translation to interject a meaning of men.

If fornication was never in the scripture, how is it that it is wrong for a man to touch a woman?

1 Corinthians 7:1Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.

Seems you are doubting an awful lot of words and meanings besides claiming fornication was never in the Bible.

 

[Grailhunter]

Peter acknowledge Paul's writing on par as scripture; 2 Peter 3:15-16

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you; 16 as also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unstedfast wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Perspective...We consider Paul's writings as scripture....Peter considered Paul's writings as scriptures. But still different context....why, they were physically were still letters....find an example of that in the Old Testament. Different set of circumstances.

Not really. John 14:23-24 & John 15:20 & 2 Timothy 3:13-17 Note books & parchments in 2 Timothy 4:13 And how Paul indirectly testified to the Book of Revelation and the apostle John's visit to the third heaven in 2 Corinthians 12:1-4

Words mean things....I said.. there is no evidence in the New Testament or history that people had copies of the Books of the New Testament.
You got to understand "books" not likely in this time period.
When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, and my scrolls, especially the parchments.
I would imagine that every Apostle had copies of something....but copies of all the texts of the New Testament...hard to prove and not likely.

Matthew 19:3-12 Other scripture does give the option of a separation, even if it becomes permanent, rather than a divorce.

Matthew is dealing with Jewish Laws and customs....
You can say the Jews divorced their wives or they gave their wives a Letter of Divorcement....
You can say that civil law developed divorce.
But there is no indication that the Christians adopt the process of divorce...or Letter of Divorce and the word divorce does not appear outside of the Gospels.

I disagree, brother. Matthew 19:3-12 again. Jesus always refers to the first marriage to set the boundary of marriage.

Not sure what your point here is? The first marriage....no ceremony....talking of what will happen? Just not sure of your point.

From the onset, God warned the future people of Israel and their future kings against polygamy.

Deuteronomy 17:14 When thou art come unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; 15 Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother. 16 But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. 17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. 18 And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: 19 And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: 20 That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.

We have seen how Israel down through the history did not always listen to God, but every now and then, when God had enough as their iniquities piled high, the nation was punished, then they repented, and restored, fell away again, punished. A repeat cycle as backsliding Israel.

So just because there were backsliding Jews & Christians in early history, that does not mean God really permitted it in the first place. Almost the same as Moses giving a writ of divorce for any thing because of the hardness of their hearts and so the same can be said for permitting polygamy.

You read this all wrong....God regulated polygamy and concubinage through the Mosaic Law....God was not regulating sin. He gave good advise to kings not to multiply their wives or marry foreign wives for a good reason. Multiply.....in the scriptures always mean huge numbers....LOL...higher math.

In the initial description of marriage....
That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
Nothing to say that a man could not have more than one wife....speaking of an event....
Be fruitful and multiply....again multiply....huge numbers....was God planning on hyper breeding that would take more than one wife?? Again this is the only commandment that God kept reiterating and a repeated promise....descendant as the stars in the sky....the sand of the shores.....the dust of the earth....what causes that? A lot of begetting?

 

[Grailhunter]

If fornication was never in the scripture, how is it that it is wrong for a man to touch a woman?

There is no if....fornication cannot be there.
The words and I say words that are replaced with the word fornication does not imply two unmarried people having sex....That is how people "got" married back then.

The Greek words that fornication replaced meant sex with prostitutes....orgies....something like casual sex.
And none of this apply to two people in love.

how is it that it is wrong for a man to touch a woman?

Read this scripture again....
This is a question from the congregation...church of Corinth. It is not a statement of Paul.
Seems you are doubting an awful lot of words and meanings besides claiming fornication was never in the Bible.
Careful! I am not denying anything....I am being patient with someone that does not study things in depth.

 

[ScottA]

would it be a sin for a single never married to marry a divorced person? many people believe the spouse is still married to the first spouse.

Do not be concerned with what was, but rather what is, and shall be.

Whoever is in Christ is divorced already. As long as you are in the world, portray marriage as if unto the Lord.

 

[Rita]

a person had stated this thread has been started a few other times. well im sorry then. i havent seen one. or i could have added to it.

i feel so welcome.

This thread is fine @lilygrace xxx

 

[Grailhunter]

a person had stated this thread has been started a few other times. well im sorry then. i havent seen one. or i could have added to it.

i feel so welcome.

Have a blast....

 

[Christ4Me]

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you; 16 as also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unstedfast wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Perspective...We consider Paul's writings as scripture....Peter considered Paul's writings as scriptures. But still different context....why, they were physically were still letters....find an example of that in the Old Testament. Different set of circumstances.

Perspective; The oldest manuscripts are the best manuscripts are forgetting one thing. Those who loved Him would be using His words, wearing out the manuscripts for why they were copied to replace the ones wearing out.

This is relevant to how they address the earliest collection of books in a "Bible". Problem is, that is an assumption. If epistles are to be shared with other churches, then a collection of the N.T. will come about. Indeed, scholars has made the assumption that the four gospels were written years after His disciples' death & yet Luke had written the Book of Acts.

I can accept what you say that they did not have all the Books of the O.T. in one collected book, but the collection of books of the O.T. & N.T. was available even though not in a collected book, yet; meaning they had the "scriptures" of the O.T. & the N.T. back in the early church days when His disciples were alive.

Words mean things....I said.. there is no evidence in the New Testament or history that people had copies of the Books of the New Testament.
You got to understand "books" not likely in this time period.
When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, and my scrolls, especially the parchments.
I would imagine that every Apostle had copies of something....but copies of all the texts of the New Testament...hard to prove and not likely.

John 21:25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

The word books in English was derived from the Greek word, "biblion" defined as "a diminutive of bibloV - biblos 976; a roll:--bill, book, scroll, writing."

In context, as referring to scripture. In Luke 4:16-21 Jesus read from the Book of Isaiah in the synagogue. On the English word opened from the Greek word " anaptusso " which is defined as "from ana - ana 303 (in the sense of reversal) and ptussw - ptusso 4428; to unroll (a scroll or volume):--open."

Kind of leads me to believe a whole scroll can contain the Book of Isaiah.

In Acts 19:19 the English word books derived from this Greek word "biblios" is defined as "properly, the inner bark of the papyrus plant, i.e. (by implication) a sheet or scroll of writing:--book." which is referring to scrolls sinners would use.

So even though a collection of books & scrolls can be fathomed, it should not be assumed that churches did not have a collection of all of the scrolls of the O.T. & the N.T. that today are found all in one book, the Bible, since the scripture has been referred to in the N.T.

 

[Christ4Me]

Matthew is dealing with Jewish Laws and customs....
You can say the Jews divorced their wives or they gave their wives a Letter of Divorcement....
You can say that civil law developed divorce.
But there is no indication that the Christians adopt the process of divorce...or Letter of Divorce and the word divorce does not appear outside of the Gospels.

Well, the action of a divorce which is to put away one's wife has been referred to in 1 Corinthians 7:11 as an example.

Not sure what your point here is? The first marriage....no ceremony....talking of what will happen? Just not sure of your point.

One can reprove the issue of polygamy by Jesus's words.

You read this all wrong....God regulated polygamy and concubinage through the Mosaic Law....God was not regulating sin. He gave good advise to kings not to multiply their wives or marry foreign wives for a good reason. Multiply.....in the scriptures always mean huge numbers....LOL...higher math.

In the initial description of marriage....
That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
Nothing to say that a man could not have more than one wife....speaking of an event....
Be fruitful and multiply....again multiply....huge numbers....was God planning on hyper breeding that would take more than one wife?? Again this is the only commandment that God kept reiterating and a repeated promise....descendant as the stars in the sky....the sand of the shores.....the dust of the earth....what causes that? A lot of begetting?

The error would be overlooking what one flesh means. If we were to flip that over, and a wife was allowed to have more than one husband, suddenly we can see the offense to God & to men. Is God a hypocrite? No. Are godly men hypocrites? Yes.

So when the Pharisees referred to Moses about divorce, Deuteronomy 24:1, & Jesus exposed it as pressured by men to do in pleasing men because of the hardness of their hearts, Mattthew 19:6-8, then polygamy has to be treated as the same.

Jesus raised the bar from how things were done, to how we are to live now with His help, meaning He will enable us to.

Christians should stop looking to themselves in following Jesus for why they fail and so make excuses for not abiding in His words in following Him but the whole point of trusting Him as our Good Shepherd to help us to follow Him is how the just shall live by faith in living that reconciled relationship with God thru Jesus Christ.

 

[Christ4Me]

There is no if....fornication cannot be there.
The words and I say words that are replaced with the word fornication does not imply two unmarried people having sex....That is how people "got" married back then.

Scripture for that? I don't think so, and so I disagree.

The Greek words that fornication replaced meant sex with prostitutes....orgies....something like casual sex.
And none of this apply to two people in love.

I have heard that from a Christian girl using that for her excuse for sleeping around; hence, she was not treating the first time as meaning she just married the guy.

Read this scripture again....
This is a question from the congregation...church of Corinth. It is not a statement of Paul.

Why not read what was written before 1 Corinthians 7th chapter?

1 Corinthians 6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. 16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. 17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. 18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. 19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

Now you could say harlot is referring to prostitution, but the description here for why it is wrong of what the man does to his own body with sex outside of marriage makes every woman and himself a harlot.

Even fornicators will call other fornicators today as whores and sluts for having their former lover.

Seems you are doubting an awful lot of words and meanings besides claiming fornication was never in the Bible.

Careful! I am not denying anything....I am being patient with someone that does not study things in depth.

There is studying in depths in the scripture and then there is studying Jews & Christians down through history. One should not apply backsliding in history nor what Moses had written in the Bible as a license to sin as if really permitted by the Lord. All we have to do is read the words of Jesus, Whom is God, to know really what He says about it.

 

[Grailhunter]

Perspective; The oldest manuscripts are the best manuscripts are forgetting one thing. Those who loved Him would be using His words, wearing out the manuscripts for why they were copied to replace the ones wearing out.

This is relevant to how they address the earliest collection of books in a "Bible". Problem is, that is an assumption. If epistles are to be shared with other churches, then a collection of the N.T. will come about. Indeed, scholars has made the assumption that the four gospels were written years after His disciples' death & yet Luke had written the Book of Acts.

I can accept what you say that they did not have all the Books of the O.T. in one collected book, but the collection of books of the O.T. & N.T. was available even though not in a collected book, yet; meaning they had the "scriptures" of the O.T. & the N.T. back in the early church days when His disciples were alive.

The history of the texts both Old and New Testament is interesting and you need to look into that.
Each "church" had it own collection of texts it favored. Copy processes is another issue. The first bound copy of the favored texts were the 50 Bibles of Constantine. Why were these the first bound copies? Look into that and you will learn a lot.

Whatever copies we are talking about were handwritten copies. Even the first bound Bibles 350 AD ~
The Gutenberg's press came out in the mid 1400's.
Some people think they were copying and distributing these texts in large quantities.
If that were true we would have a lot more copies of the older texts.
As it is most of the oldest texts (scrolls) have been found in churches. Some have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
For the Geneva Bible and the King James Bible their sources were prior translations of Greek and Latin.
As it is now we have copies of the older texts....and it is always copies. And we have enough now to see that as the copies came forward things were added to them. Some of them were good stories like the story of the adulterous woman brought before Christ.
But by the time the Geneva Bible and King James Bible came out there were popular theological doctrines and "buzz words and phrases" that made their way into these translations.

As far as Christ or people reading from the Old Testament....that is no surprise....scrolls of the Old Testament did exist and if you look they were not reading them on a street corner. These scrolls were kept in the temple or synagogues.

 

[Grailhunter]

Well, the action of a divorce which is to put away one's wife has been referred to in 1 Corinthians 7:11 as an example.

Put away is more or less leave. No Christian process for divorce....like I said the word divorce does not occur outside the Gospels.
Now the Bible never required wedding ceremonies.....but why no Christian process for divorce?....only speculation exists on that.

One can reprove the issue of polygamy by Jesus's words.

Well if you can find a moratorium on Polygamy or concubinage in the Old or New Testament....you would make a lot of people happy but it would not change history.
The funny thing....you will not find the word polygamy in the Old or New Testament.......it is just called a marriage.

The error would be overlooking what one flesh means. If we were to flip that over, and a wife was allowed to have more than one husband, suddenly we can see the offense to God & to men. Is God a hypocrite? No. Are godly men hypocrites? Yes.

I understand that Christians do not like it. I don't like it. The one flesh thing is between the two and not how it turned out and God knew that. Polygamous relationships started very early. The Mosaic Law regulated it. God the Father never condemned it and when speaking to King David (through prophet Nathan) took credit for his wives. 2nd Samuel 12:8. Then in the New Testament neither Christ or the Apostles spoke against polygamy or concubinage. I wish they would have because it would have stopped quicker. But they did not speak against slavery either.

So when the Pharisees referred to Moses about divorce, Deuteronomy 24:1, & Jesus exposed it as pressured by men to do in pleasing men because of the hardness of their hearts, Mattthew 19:6-8, then polygamy has to be treated as the same.

You can read anything you want to into it.....that is the good thing about the beliefs....it just did not happen.