so will he

The idea that 2 people can have the exact opposite opinion of what god/jesus say about divorce summarizes a lot of my issues with religion. If it was anything other than religion, no one would put this much credence in stories that were told to people, and then other people, written down by people lying about who they were (and in some cases, not even knowing who wrote it), and then translated, translated again, versioned, re-written, again, etc, etc. Heck, at the beginning, there were a lot more letters and epistles that were written, and the church made executive decisions on which ones seemed "real" and which were written by liars. I just don't understand that. How can anyone have any sense that what they are living their lives by is even authentic?


Why not decide for yourself if you should get divorced or not? What will make your life better? What will make your wife's life better? Your kid's? I'd start there if it were me.

_________________

Not to defend MD, but here you go Seacrest. Drop down to whichever version you darn well please.

http://www.biblica.com/app.php/bibles/chapter/?version=niv&verse=Matthew+5:21-32

There are many versions. They all came from an original version and translation.

_________________

So that's admitting you're wrong then. Thanks.

No one made up that exception. It was always in the Greek.

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Up is down.

Left is right.

Black is white.

_________________

Do you realize that the link you posted on the previous page contradicts what you are restating again on this page?

_________________

Do you realize you are completely ignoring that fact that ME of all people stood up for MD and gave you ample links to versions that have that verse in them?

Or are we gonna play the usual "The version I know is the ONLY version that's acceptable and if you dare call me out on it you hate Catholics stop picking on me" game.

I commend you for trying to act more human. Keep it up.

There is an original version of most everything. I still waiting for MD to do his homework and find out when the version changed.

We knew there were different versions before you arrived. But thanks for sharing.

_________________

I'm not questioning that there are different versions. You are the one who seems to be doing that



And then I provided a link to that exact verse in numerous different versions including the King James. Are you saying that ALL of those translations are wrong and that whatever nebulous version you are choosing for the sake of this discussion is the only one that matters?

I believe the Dead Sea Scrolls were found to be like 98% identical to modern editions of the books. Older non religious books than the bible are considered to have kept the integrity of their teaching even if they were originally passed orally, such as Greek philosophy.

What is the point at which we are no longer to put credence into an old story. Our entire legal system is built upon the scholarship of old interpretations, which themselves are built upon the scholarship of old interpretations from another country.

I'm not one who relies on authority to replace my own judgment but you are misguided if you don't at least look for some direction from the wisdom of the past. I run just about every major decision in my life by my dad, just for counsel and to see if I missed something in my decision making. There is no prize for making an ignorant decision that is entirely yours instead of a well considered decision that is blended with the thoughts of others.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Yea, that's sort of my point. I'd rather use all the information available to decide if divorce is ok. I don't want to make a decision on it based on what god/jesus may or may not have said.

And further, I can probably argue you don't need to really rely on religion for most moral issues. A lot of times common sense would rule. You'd know to make the right decision without needing to check with what your religion says (thou shall not kill, rape, etc).

The Dead Sea Scrolls are actually only the Old Testament. But there are plenty of manuscripts of the New Testament and a 99.5 percentage is accurate between all the copies.

Unless Seacrest has some links there is no evidence that this passage has ever been altered.

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

I have a problem with the Ten Commandments. Here it is: Why are there ten? We don't need that many. I think the list of commandments was deliberately and artificially inflated to get it up to ten. It's clearly a padded list.

Here's how it happened: About five thousand years ago, a bunch of reli­gious and political hustlers got together to figure out how they could control people and keep them in line. They knew people were basically stupid and would believe anything they were told, so these guys announced that God— God personally—had given one of them a list of Ten Commandments that he wanted everyone to follow. They claimed the whole thing took place on a mountaintop, when no one else was around.

But let me ask you something: When these guys were sittin' around the tent makin' all this up, why did they pick ten? Why ten? Why not nine, or eleven? I'll tell you why. Because ten sounds important. Ten sounds official. They knew if they tried eleven, people wouldn't take them seriously. People would say, "What're you kiddin' me? The Eleven Commandments? Get the fuck outta here!"

But ten! Ten sounds important. Ten is the basis for the decimal system; it's a decade. It's a psychologically satisfying number: the top ten; the ten most wanted; the ten best-dressed. So deciding on Ten Commandments was clearly a marketing decision. And it's obviously a bullshit list. In truth, it's a politic; document, artificially inflated to sell better.

I'm going to show you how you can reduce the number of commandments and come up with a list that's a bit more logical and realistic. We'll start with the first three, and I'll use the Roman Catholic version because those are the ones I was fed as a little boy.

• I AM THE LORD THY GOD, THOU SHALT NOT HAVE STRANGE
GODS BEFORE ME.

• THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD THY GOD IN
VAIN.

• THOU SHALT KEEP HOLY THE SABBATH.

Okay, right off the bat, the first three commandments—pure bullshit "Sabbath day," "Lord's name," "strange gods." Spooky language. Spooky language designed to scare and control primitive people. In no way does superstitious mumbo jumbo like this apply to the lives of intelligent, civilized human in the twenty-first century. You throw out the first three commandments, am you're down to seven.

•HONOR THY FATHER AND MOTHER.

This commandment is about obedience and respect for authority; in other words it's simply a device for controlling people. The truth is, obedience and respect should not be granted automatically. They should be earned. They should be based on the parents' (or the authority figure's) performance. Some parents deserve respect. Most of them don't. Period. We're down to six.

Now, in the interest of logic—something religion has a really hard time with—I'm going to skip around the list a little bit:

• THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.

• THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS.

Stealing and lying. Actually, when you think about it, these two com­mandments cover the same sort of behavior: dishonesty. Stealing and lying. So we don't need two of them. Instead, we combine these two and call it "Thou shalt not be dishonest." Suddenly we're down to five.

And as long as we're combining commandments I have two others that be­long together:

• THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.

• THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR'S WIFE.

Once again, these two prohibit the same sort of behavior; in this case, mar­ital infidelity. The difference between them is that coveting takes place in the mind. And I don't think you should outlaw fantasizing about someone else's wife, otherwise what's a guy gonna think about when he's flogging his dong?

But marital fidelity is a good idea, so I suggest we keep the idea and call this commandment "Thou shalt not be unfaithful." Suddenly we're down to four.

And when you think about it further, honesty and fidelity are actually parts of the same overall value. So, in truth, we could combine the two honesty commandments with the two fidelity commandments, and, using positive lan­guage instead of negative, call the whole thing "Thou shalt always be honest and faithful." And now we're down to three.

•THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR'S GOODS.

This one is just plain stupid. Coveting your neighbor's goods is what keeps the economy going: Your neighbor gets a vibrator that plays "O Come All Ye Faithful," you want to get one, too. Coveting creates jobs. Leave it alone.

You throw out coveting and you're down to two now: the big, combined honesty/fidelity commandment, and the one we haven't mentioned yet:

•THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

Murder. The Fifth Commandment. But, if you give it a little thought, you realize that religion has never really had a problem with murder. Not really. More people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason.

To cite a few examples, just think about Irish history, the Middle East, the Crusades, the Inquisition, our own abortion-doctor killings and, yes, the World Trade Center to see how seriously religious people take Thou Shalt Not Kill. Apparently, to religious folks—especially the truly devout—murder is ne­gotiable. It just depends on who's doing the killing and who's getting killed.

And so, with all of this in mind, folks, I offer you my revised list of the Two Commandments:

First:

•THOU SHALT ALWAYS BE HONEST AND FAITHFUL, ESPECIALLY
TO THE PROVIDER OF THY NOOKIE.

And second:

•THOU SHALT TRY REAL HARD NOT TO KILL ANYONE, UNLESS,
OF COURSE, THEY PRAY TO A DIFFERENT INVISIBLE AVENGER
THAN THE ONE YOU PRAY TO.

Two is all you need, folks. Moses could have carried them down the hill in his pocket. And if we had a list like that, I wouldn't mind that brilliant judge in Alabama displaying it prominently in his courthouse lobby. As long he in­cluded one additional commandment:

•THOU SHALT KEEP THY RELIGION TO THYSELF!!!

_________________

That's brilliant, love it

Was that Carlin? If not, he borrowed heavily from his style.

_________________

Indeed it was.

_________________

The movie Religuous made reference to these stories. Thoughts?

Pre-Jesus stories that made up the Jesus Myth
WHO WAS HE?

He was born of the virgin Maya, who was considered the "Queen of Heaven.
He was of royal descent.
He crushed a serpent's head.
He performed miracles and wonders, healed the sick, fed 500 men from a "small basket of cakes," and walked on water.
He abolished idolatry, was a "sower of the word," and preached "the establishment of a kingdom of righteousness."
He taught chastity, temperance, tolerance, compassion, love, and the equality of all.
He was transfigured on a mount.
He was crucified in a sin-atonement, suffered for three days in hell, and was resurrected.
He ascended to "heaven."
HE WAS...BUDDHA (563 B.C.)

He contributed the name of Jesus Christ. He and his once-and-future Father, are frequently interchangeable in the mythos ("I and my Father are one").
He was born of the virgin Meri on December 25th in a cave/manger, with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
He was a child teacher in the Temple and was baptized when he was 30 years old. He was also baptized by "Anup the Baptizer," who becomes "John the Baptist."
He had 12 disciples.
He performed miracles and raised one man, el-Azar-us, from the dead.
He walked on water.
He was transfigured on the Mount.
He was crucified, buried in a tomb and resurrected.
He was also the "Way, the Truth, the Light, the Messiah, God's Anointed Son, the Son of Man, the Good Shepherd, the Lamb of God, the Word" etc.
He was "the Fisher," and was associated with the Lamb, Lion and Fish.
His personal epithet was "Iusa," the "ever-becoming son" of "Ptah," the "Father."
HE was called "the KRST," or "Anointed One," long before the Christians duplicated the story.
In the catacombs at Rome are pictures of Him as a baby being held by his virgin mother.
HE WAS... the Ancient Egyptian God HORUS (prior to 3100 B.C.)

(The ancient Egyptians also adopted the cross as a religious symbol of their pagan gods. Countless Egyptians drawings depict themselves holding crosses in their hands. Among them, the Egyptian savior Horus is depicted holding a cross in his hand. He is also depicted as an infant sitting on his mother's knee with a cross on the seat they occupy. The most common of the crosses used by these pagan Egyptians, the crux ansata, was later adopted by the Christians)
He was born on December 25th.
He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
He had 12 companions or disciples.
He performed miracles.
He was buried in a tomb.
After three days he rose again.
His resurrection was celebrated every year.
He was called "the Good Shepherd."
He was considered "the Way, the Truth and the Light, the Redeemer, the Savior, the Messiah."
He was identified with both the Lion and the Lamb.
His sacred day was Sunday, "the Lord's Day," hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.
He had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, at which time he was resurrected.
His religion had a Eucharist or "Lord's Supper."
HE WAS... MITHRA (about 2000 B.C.)

("He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation." An inscription to Mithras which parallels John 6:53-54. This inscription is inside the vatican... in the tomb of saint peter.)
Born of a Virgin
His father was a carpenter.
His birth was attended by angels, wise men and shepherds, and he was presented with gold, frankincense and myrrh.
He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
He was of royal descent.
He was baptized in A river.
He worked miracles and wonders.
He raised the dead and healed lepers, the deaf and the blind.
He used parables to teach the people about charity and love.
"He lived poor and he loved the poor."
He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven.
He is called the "Shepherd God" and "Lord of lords," and was considered "the Redeemer, Firstborn, Sin Bearer, Liberator, Universal Word."
He is the second person of the Trinity, and proclaimed himself the "Resurrection" and the "way to the Father."
He was considered the "Beginning, the Middle and the End," ("Alpha and Omega"), as well as being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. - His disciples bestowed upon him the title "Jezeus," meaning "pure essence."
He is to return to do battle with the "Prince of Evil," who will desolate the earth
HE WAS... KRISHNA (around 400 B.C.)

(The similarities between the Christian character and the Indian messiah are many. Indeed, Massey finds over 100 similarities between the Hindu and Christian saviors, and Graves, who includes the various noncanonical gospels in his analysis, lists over 300 likenesses. It should be noted that a common earlier English spelling of Krishna was "Christna," which reveals its relation to '"Christ." It should also be noted that, like the Jewish godman, many people have believed in a historical, carnalized Krishna)
God was his father
He was born in a cave or cowshed.
A human woman, a virgin, was his mother.
His birth was prophesized by a star in the heavens.
At a marriage ceremony, he performed the miracle of converting water into wine.
He was powerless to perform miracles in his hometown.
His followers were born-again through baptism in water.
He rode triumphantly into a city on a donkey. Tradition records that the inhabitants waved palm leaves.
He had 12 disciples.
He was accused of licentious behavior.
He was killed near the time of the Vernal Equinox, about MAR-21.
He died "as a sacrifice for the sins of the world."
He was hung on a tree, stake, or cross.
After death, he descended into hell.
On the third day after his death, he returned to life.
The cave where he was laid was visited by three of his female followers.
He later ascended to heaven.
His titles: God made flesh. Savior of the world Son of God.
He is "God made man," and equal to the Father.
He will return in the last days.
He will judge the human race at that time.
Humans are separated from God by original sin. The godman's sacrificial death reunites the believer with God and atones for the original sin.
HE WAS... OSIRIS-DIONYSUS (about 2500 B.C.)

_________________
Mr. Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office.- JD Vance
If you committed violence on that day, obviously, you shouldn’t be pardoned.- JD Vance on the J-6 insurrectionists

Seems like religion has been part and parcel to the human condition since the beginning of time. Probably a result of natural selection.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

Rectum? Damn near killed 'em!

_________________
Sex isn't dirty, sex isn't a crime. It's a loving act between two or more consenting adults.

-Hank Kingsley

If they were common sense our rules wouldn't vary as widely among countries. Even the murder one varies greatly among societies and almost all allow some form of murder. Did you forget George Zimmerman?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

5.32 unchastity: The Greek word used here appears to refer to marriages that were not legally marriages because they were either within the forbidden degrees of consanguinity (Lev 18.6-16) or contracted with a Gentile. The phrase except on the ground of unchastity does not occur in the parallel passage in Lk 16.18. See also Mt 19.9 (Mk 10.11-12), and especially 1 Cor 7.10-11 which shows that the prohibition is unconditional.

Above is the actual citation from your own link that is supposed to back up your grounds for a divorce.

The part of the citation in bold actually contradicts what you are alleging, which is that divorce is OK in certain circumstances.

Are you saying that you agree with me, or that you didn't read what you actually cited?

_________________

Seacrest, even you have to concede that the OT was the holy book long before the NT was. And the OT makes no mention of Jesus. When did that get added? We really need to just go with what was in the original.

It makes no mention of him by name that I have ever read.. You are absolutely correct.

There are 547 different prophecies in the OT that are fulfilled by that guy named Jesus though.

_________________

So you are saying then that the NT is just a made up story to fulfill those prophesies? Because if every time evidence contrary to your narrow view of "the way things are" you want to just dig back farther to find a version of the story of a supreme being that fits your narrative I can do this all day.

I don't agree with the footnote's interpretation, but my point is that even the Catholic translation has a similar word for marital unfaithfulness and that it was not added later as you suggested.

I do think that divorce is actually permitted for Christians, but it's clear from the Bible that God hates divorce.

This author's perspective would give a good Evangelical viewpoint as he is a marriage expert who has written a lot on the subject of marriage:
http://www.moodyradio.org/brd_ProgramDe ... ?id=108164

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Thank you for posting the actual crux of the issue. Jesus' own words are unconditional about divorce.

You interpret what you think is ok. Other people do the same thing with regards to sexual morality.
You can quote, recite or regurgitate whatever you wish. If morality is relative for you then you have no moral authority to claim something else for others.

_________________