|
For years I have been on various Internet lists and
pressed the point that Jesus could not have taught that a divorced
person must remain celibate because it would have required that he
taught contrary to the Law, which allowed it (Deut 24:1-4). I
challenged for debate on the matter for a very long time before someone
finally agreed. That debate (Galloway/Waters) may be seen at: http://www.religiousdebates.com
A young man Ethan Longhenry (22 year old), was the first
(as far as I know) to finally come up with a response to a very strong
argument I had been using as a means to get people to give up misusing
the teachings of Jesus in their teaching that divorced persons may not
marry. I had been showing to brethren on a list that Jesus could not
have taught such a doctrine because it would have required that Jesus
have transgressed the Law. This young man’s teaching was thought to be
the answer. It was accepted and praised immediately to the point that
he made a reply that he feared such attention and praise would give him
the big-head. At any rate, list members apparently viewed his position
as being one they were willing to support. We had a discussion on
several points, but the list owner, Jon Quinn, got mad and kicked me
off the list. There is only one point that I feel is critical to be
brought out on this page. The entire discussion can be read at Ethan's
Web site:
http://www.deusvitae.com/faith/debates/watersdiscussion.html
Below are excerpts (in order) taken from our discussion:
Ethan: “Who ever said that I was saying that Jesus was
teaching contrary to the Law? Again, everything Jesus taught could
easily have been practiced by Jew and would never fall under
condemnation of the Law.”
rw
"Ethan, I really do not need to go further than this (dealing with this
paragraph) because you have denied a point that is fundamental in our
discussion. If I can show that your statement above is not in harmony
with your teaching and practice (and I can) then your position will be
seen as error. "
First, I agree with your statement above and I
appreciate that several list members also agree with it. However, you
apparently believe that Jesus taught that a divorced person cannot
marry (based on what you have said) and I’m going to proceed based upon
that assumption.
Let us say that Jesus told the Pharisees: You who have
divorced your wives and married another are now living in adultery.
That is what I understand you to be teaching that Jesus said as it is
recorded, thou you say He was only “pointing to” the time when it would
be included into the N.T. But, Ethan, Jesus said it to the Pharisees.
That cannot be denied. And, to not apply it to those to whom it was
spoken is to ignore or deny a fundamental hermetical rule for Bible
study. He said it to the Pharisees and they were guilty of apoluo their
wives and marrying another, which Jesus said was adultery and which you
agree was adultery. There was no need for God to have included such
teachings in the record if it did not apply to them. The apostles could
have dealt with the MDR issue later, and of course Paul did. But who is
willing to look there without first having their mind made up on MDR?
Here is the kicker: You say regarding not only Mt19 but
also all of Jesus’ teachings, that what he taught, “…Could easily have
been practiced by Jew and would never fall under condemnation of the
Law.” But such is either error or your interpretation of Mat19 is
error, because the Law forbad treachery and adultery (Ezra 9,10;
Lev20:10).
There can be no doubt that your interpretation of Jesus
teaching is error because it has him transgressing by teaching contrary
to the Law. Jesus did not teach contrary to the Law, and your subtle
way of trying to avoid being seen as saying something that implicates
Jesus as a Law violator is exposed. Asserting that what Jesus said to
sinners under the Law was not applicable to them, that it did not apply
to them and that they could practice what he condemned is not only a
dodge or quibble, it implies that Jesus spoke without authority and
that He did not tell the truth. To do what YOU say Jesus taught, they
would have had to violate the Law by stopping being faithful to their
wives IMMEDIATELY. And, even if Jesus’ words did not have to be obeyed
by them there is no evidence that the people taught on the day of
Pentecost, or thereafter, were told their legal marriages were
adulterous. The only examples we have are where the marriage was not
legal, and that is in perfect harmony with what Jesus actually taught.
|
