Mark 10:11 - the interpretation, please (Jesus Christ, translation, church, eternal)

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Dunemeister

How so? In one passage, he's comparing lustful thoughts to adultery. In the passage at issue here, he's not making that comparison. He's not comparing divorce to adultery, he's saying that if you divorce AND remarry, THEN you've committed adultery.

No, he is saying if you divorce and remarry - to separate but not mutually exclusive terms - that you commit adultery. One need not have a writ of divorce to remarry - one can simply tell his wife to leave, and take another wife. Some scholars think that Jesus may be prohibiting this action, requiring husbands to provide for their wives if they send them out, which is noble to be sure.

In any case, if one remarries one commits adultery, and if one divorces, it is adultery, as Jesus says.

(as I said in the beginning)

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

It should be interpreted thusly:

"Whoever puts away his wife commits adultery against her"

and

"Whoever marries another commits adultery against her"

If you see more than that here, I suggest it's because you are conflating unrelated texts.

We see the same thing, you're simply interpreting it incorrectly.

[angellous_evangellous]

In the other thread, MidnightBlue conceded:

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

I'm not really following that, but every patristic reference I can find reads it your way and not mine.

Of course, I know that I am correct - inasmuch as one can be in these things - but knowing Bill's patristic references would be helpful.

[ChristineES]

I believe that Jesus is saying that even if you get a divorce in the world, God does not recognize the divorce and in His eyes the couple is still married and therefore commits adultery.
As for looking at women, I know of one man (one I know very well) who committed adultery after he looked lustfully at another woman. "Just looking" could very easily turn into the real thing.

[Big_TJ]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

In the other thread, MidnightBlue conceded:

Of course, I know that I am correct - inasmuch as one can be in these things - but knowing Bill's patristic references would be helpful.

Of course, MidnightBlue did infact suggest that he does not agree with that interpretation.

So, help me with this. How does the act of "putting away your wife/husband" suddenly become the same as "having sexual intercourse with someone other than your wife/husband (as adultery is defined? For your interpretation to be correct, then we have to totally reject the definition of adultery. If we reject it, what really is the meaning of the word "Adultery" (reference please)?

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Big_TJ

So, help me with this. How does the act of "putting away your wife/husband" suddenly become the same as "having sexual intercourse with someone other than your wife/husband

In the same way that "looking at a woman" becomes "having sexual intercourse."

But I've already said that...

OR

Perhaps in the same way that remarriage becomes adultery. Jeez.

[Big_TJ]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

No.. it's just a higher standard, like looking at a woman. Lust may cause adultery, but Jesus taught that in itself is adultery. It's a higher standard than the actual event. Divorce is obviously more extreme, and that is adultery too, because it flies in the face of the unification that God is bringing about through Jesus Christ. Paul later applies this unification to Christ and the Church.

All sorts of sins were compared to adultery in the OT. In the end, worshipping another god, being allies with the wrong country, all of these things were adultery. It's a metaphor for sin.

There is another issue with this. The one of the definition of Divorce is "a dissolving of a marriage in whole or in part." There is no evidence in the 17 definitions of the word "divorce" that tells who divorced who. Therefore, even with your interpretation, there seem to be a difference between "whoever puts away his wife commits adultery" and " if you divorce you commit adultery." The difference (as I see it) is that the first instance is specific to the person who "did the wrong" while the second phrase seem to be talking about both parties to the marriage."

[Big_TJ]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

In the same way that "looking at a woman" becomes "having sexual intercourse."

But I've already said that...

OR

Perhaps in the same way that remarriage becomes adultery. Jeez.

No, you are not correct. "Looking on a woman" doesnt become "having sexual intercourse" Read the scripture again:

Matthew 5:28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.


It did you committed adultery "in your heart" This is using adultery more as a metaphor more than the physical aspect having sexual intercourse.

Re-Marrying as adultery can be seen because it is widely expected that sexual intercourse is a part of any marriage.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Big_TJ

There is another issue with this. The one of the definition of Divorce is "a dissolving of a marriage in whole or in part." There is no evidence in the 17 definitions of the word "divorce" that tells who divorced who. Therefore, even with your interpretation, there seem to be a difference between "whoever puts away his wife commits adultery" and " if you divorce you commit adultery." The difference (as I see it) is that the first instance is specific to the person who "did the wrong" while the second phrase seem to be talking about both parties to the marriage."

Yes, give a dictionary to a fool and he'll always come up with the wrong conclusions.

Remarriage is adultery. Divorce is adultery. Neither one of them are "sexual relations with someone to whom one is not married," because the adultery is being committed against the woman who is being put away and not the woman that the man is remarrying. Strict definitions are useless because they are being refined and re-applied by Christ.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Big_TJ

No, you are not correct. "Looking on a woman" doesnt become "having sexual intercourse"

Because that is something that I did not say.

Your logical ineptitude is insufferable.

I used the example to demonstrate that your strict definition of adultery as "sexual intercourse" is inept.

Would you like me to reduce this to a first grade level? It would be difficult to make it any simpler than this... but I could try...

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Big_TJ

No, you are not correct. "Looking on a woman" doesnt become "having sexual intercourse" Read the scripture again:

Matthew 5:28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.


It did you committed adultery "in your heart" This is using adultery more as a metaphor more than the physical aspect having sexual intercourse.

Re-Marrying as adultery ca