|
That the word APOLUO means “put away” in English, virtually no one denies. However, some seem determined to teach others that “put away” means the entire divorce process as defined by Moses in Deut. 24:1,3 and as we commonly understand it today. Their strategy in defending tradition is to use the phrase “put away” virtually everywhere one would normally use the word “divorce”. The apparent thinking is that if the word is misused long enough the meaning will be changed in the mind of people, and when “put away” is mentioned it will automatically be understood that “divorce” is the context.
Look up the phrase “put away” in “Wordnet Dictionary”, “Collins English Dictionary”, and “Encarta English Dictionary”, and you will find various meanings, but DIVORCE is NOT among them.
Regardless of the fact that “put away” does not mean divorce, Don Martin, David Willis and others, are constantly, and deliberately (in their writings) trying to FORCE the phrase “put away” to mean “divorce”. Obviously, the word “divorce” would much better portray what they mean. When they truly want to accurately communicate what they mean they say “divorce”. For example, if one was a candidate for baptism they would ask, “Have you been divorced”, rather than ask, “Are you a ‘put away’ woman/man,” which is terminology they use in their writings?
What these brethren are doing is no less deceptive than the practice of some denominational preacher in his effort to teach his doctrine on the mode for baptism. When he speaks of baptism, he SAYS “sprinkle” in place of baptism, which means immersion. Why, because it is important that people accept the words as being the same thing, even though he knows they are two different words with different meanings, as is the case with "put away" (from APOLUO) and "divorce" (from APOSTASION). The idea is, if they say it enough people will just accept that they are the same. It appears to be a deliberate and deceptive effort to change the language.
Let us note some examples of what I am talking about:
Truth:
Paul said, “ I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.”
Perversion:
Paul said he was thankful that he sprinkled none except Crispus and Gaius, lest any should say he had sprinkled in his own name.
Truth:
In a legal/scriptural divorce, the one who was divorced received a certificate of divorcement and is no longer married to the man who divorced her.
Perversion (and absurdity):
In a legal/scriptural “put away”, the person who was put away is still married to the person who “put her away”.
There is something very interesting in the above noted “perversion”. Since “put away” does not mean “divorce”, the person “put away” IS INDEED STILL MARRIED to the person who “put her away”. Thus, in their efforts to mislead, by misusing terms, they have gotten confused; and with their on misuse of terminology, they have defeated their own position, which is the idea that in Jesus' statement that a "put away" person commits adultery when they marry, he was MEANING DIVORCE.
Those who deliberately use “put away” in place of divorce, refuse to consider the fact that one can be “put away” and never receive a certificate of divorce, which would only have amounted to a separation.
The Mosaic Law never allowed the practice of putting away and not divorcing, although it was suffered or tolerated. But India law actually, at least at one time, allowed it. And it is interesting that these people clearly understood the difference in being divorced and put away.
"A wife who is barren may be “put away” but not divorced, and then another wife may be taken without fault…Separate residence merely affords a presumption, which however may be rebutted that such a woman is a concubine and not a wife." The All India Digest Section II (Civil) 1811–1911 by T.V. Sanjivi Row
Below is a link to an article by Mike Willis that fully explains the reason for the command found in Deut. 24:1-4. Below that is a link that proves that the practice that resulted in the command to provide the “bill of divorcement” is still going on in Israel today:
Mike Willis' Exegesis of Deut 24:1
Jewish Women in Chains
|
