Scripture does not say unfaithfulness is the reason to allow for divorce. This is a protestant interpretation of the Greek work porneia which means un chastity which needs further context which is handed down by the apostles to the Fathers of the Church down to today in the Catholic Church meaning that a person can only be “divorced” if the “marriage” that took place in time was prevented from coming true in reality, like that there was a prenup or that you are marrying your cousin or that you are entering into a marriage with the intention of never having children.
'Scripture does not say unfaithfulness is the reason to allow for divorce'
'Jesus' Teaching about Divorce' Matthew 19:1-12...
Matthew 19:9 'And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.'
Also Matthew 5:31-32 'Divorce'...
'The New American Bible (NAB) is a Catholic Bible translation first published in 1970. It is the basis of the revised Lectionary, and is the only translation approved for use at Mass in the dioceses'
Matthew 19:9 catholic version...'I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.'
1970...?! No Thanks...
Joboww, you are wrong here... you must first remember that we are talking about marriage in the sense that they got married in those days... If you slept with a woman you were married... There was absolutely no legal definition of marriage it was a religious institution only... There fore the Greek word Porneia (where we get pornography from) means infidelity or sexual deviance. Un chastity as you wrote it means straying from the bond of marriage which in the sense of marriage in those days and in God's eyes is having sex with someone besides you spouse... it really is simple.. the Catholic and Protestant church have crafted a new meaning to go along with the legal definitions to keep seat full in the church because today soooooo many divorce for the wrong reasons..
Here is Matthew 19:9 from the Latin Vulgate...now, go translate it to English and tell us what it says (I already know)...
Matthew 19:9 'Dico autem vobis, quia quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam, nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, mœchatur: et qui dimissam duxerit, mœchatur.'
April 16, 2015 at 12:07pm
Rubio goes to Mass only on the holidays. the telegraph exposed him back in 2010 as contributing primarily to a protestant group.
Rubio is a Catholic when he needs to be but sends his kids elsewhere. 2 articles:
@Spike speaking in tongues or what one proposes as tongues does not represent an objective way to coming to what is the truth. If you go to one of these events and you find another who also speaks in tongues but you disagree on a doctrine what do you do then? Do you both not have the Holy Spirits protection? How do you know that they are not right and you wrong. You see this is a subjective feeling that might make you feel warm and zealous but its not objective to determine what is truth. What of the Catholic Charismatic movement, which is the same thing with the same type of people seeking out a transformative experience, speaking in tongues just as you. St. Paul told us that not all will be prophets or speak in tongues, and the Apostles did not receive authority because they spoke in rational tongues, but because Christ passed down his authority, and the Apostles continued this by the laying on of hands which Paul recounts. Again why trust your subjective experiences? Why? If there is a disagreement in doctrine between you and me how do we fulfill Matthew 18:15? Do we go to you for a binding decision? Can you tell me why your personal testimony is objectivly more important than a Mormon?
 April 10, 2015 at 9:25am
plus if that is your take then if two tongue speakers have different doctrines that they hold to like on the significance of Baptism how do you know which is right? The one that has a more delicate accent?
 April 10, 2015 at 9:19am
@Spike Thank you for providing more subjective experiences. So your claim is that you can speak in tongues therefore you have the Holy Ghost in you. Of course there is no guarantee that speaking in a different tongue is necessarily a gift from God, it might well be from the other side. Can you comprehend what it is that is being said or is it mere gibberish? The devil when he takes possession of people is able to use his knowledge of languages and blaspheme God in such languages but you and I wouldnt necessarily know unless we knew the language. If someone does not speak in tongues are they not of God? Paul suggests otherwise in 1 Corinthians 12. SO trace you’re proposed teachings from the apostles to the Apostolic fathers who were taught directly by the Apostles to the Church Fathers taught by them. Subjective experiences of warm feelings and speaking other languages might seem mystical but there is no guarantee of truth proceeding therein.
 April 8, 2015 at 9:30am
@Spike If I disagree with you and present a different view that is longer than a paragraph it is not logical to proclaim it as being prideful. If your perception of me is that I think myself superior that is your own perception, but I see nothing wrong with being smarter or less intelligent. Christ loves both, and both have responsibilities within the Church’s life so…
I realized you don’t care what I say when you said you were firm in your “beliefs” and could not be moved no matter the objective evidence presented. One might object to your own pride on this account. Why are you worried? If you have the truth prove it objectively. Faith is no mere trust but a response to grace with ones reason and will, not apart from it.
And yes it is a feeling just like the Mormons because ultimately you have zero ability to bind anyone to anything you believe because Christ gave you zero authority to do so. Give me one reason, just one why you think you are guided by the Holy Spirit and I am not. Because I disagree with you?
How do you know you are not blaspheming yourself? Why do you propose your knowledge as from the Holy Ghost? Objectively trace your thinking to the apostles, not just to Luther who you don’t even agree with, but you have the Spirit?
BTW you writing a 3 stanza poem is not elitist? come on thats a contradiction by your own standards
 April 7, 2015 at 9:34am
More rhetoric so console yourself. Please. You claim humility but set yourself as the authority. You are your own Pope, be honest with yourself. Give one reason, one objective reason why anyone should follow what you say.
 April 7, 2015 at 9:33am
Now you are honest. You are settled in your ignorance, I could give you evidence again and again that points to the apostles handing down their authority to their successors as Christ told them to but you don’t care for pursuing truth no matter where it takes you. Your opinion that you have the holy spirit guiding you. This is nothing more than a feeling. Why should one follow your feelings on anything? But when you disagree with your own brothers on doctrines pray tell who is right? Does Baptism of Water and the spirit save or is Baptism merely a symbol? Do you have the authority to bind another’s thinking on what you claim as what the Holy Spirit as guided you to? You are not independent of a tradition. You were told how to read scripture and accepted it because it felt right not for any objective reason besides your feelings.
 April 7, 2015 at 9:32am
Yes you did dodge because you have no response other than to say that you have nothing but your feelings to appeal to. The joke is that you say additions were made to the canon but you cant point to a Jewish canon that was bound before the nonexistent council of Jamnia which Luther in his ignorance pretended to appeal to even though the Jews lost their authority to bind by that time. The canon of scripture was not set until the 300’s at Hippo and Rome. It was first codified at Second Nicaea in the 700’s, given further explication at Florence and formally dogmatized at Trent. You did not add indeed but took away from that which God had willed to be part of the scripture. Other then your subjective feelings give one reason why you blaspheme the Dueterocanon as apocrypha. What authority do you have other than your feelings to make any binding statements? Its not rhetorical to ask why you accept each book on its own merits as scripture. You blindly accept what Luther told you and that Calvin afforded you, both of whom had no authority to speak or to change anything. Luther set himself up as the moral figure, but there is nothing besides his feelings, as well, to appeal to when declaring his doctrines to be that of the Holy Ghost and that those who disagree with him are wrong. Yet you would not hold to all of his doctrines now would you?
April 7, 2015 at 9:08am
umm i dont disagree with you that Jesus is the only High Priest, perhaps you are unaware of Catholic teaching on this. Second while our Lord is indeed in heaven he is also in every tabernacle here on this Earth now. Mind blowing I know. When he says “This is my body” and that it is true food and true drink, for just as the Lamb of sacrifice was to be consumed so that all the Jews part took in the sacrifice (as a fore shadow of what was to come), so to you must eat or you have no life in you. Christos, continue not looking at pictures lest you idolize your family….
 April 6, 2015 at 5:44pm
I wish it was blunt instead you dodged. Saying that scripture says scripture is inspired doesn’t answer which book that was written constitutes part of the canon of scripture. And saying that God will give us what we need presupposes knowing how it will be given. Did it fall from the sky this canon of scripture? So ultimately you feel that in your heart you know its true because you have a subjective feeling that it is right since you feel that God has inspired you to know this? How are you sure of this? Is there an objective thing that you can point to to dispute why others find your canon wanting other than a feeling that you know better on a personal level?
Point is the Bible does not explain itself. If you want to give an objective reason by Ester or 2nd Timothy is part of the canon that would be great.
The rest of your words are rhetoric to comfort yourself so keep on track here.
 April 6, 2015 at 4:36pm
so your response is empty rhetoric. congrats. Dear protestant riddle me this, how do you know objectivly that every book in scripture belongs in scripture? No poems needed, just a simple answer. Good luck Spike!
 April 6, 2015 at 1:23pm
dont look at pictures of your loved ones lest you idolize them….
Re:faith vs. works:It was also Jesus the Christ who told his diciples they could sort outtrue from false religious enthusiasts by looking at the results they got;'by their fruits you will know them."
[-5] April 6, 2015 at 12:57pm
so folks that think they are in the Aaronic line decided to put on a shawl and deliver blessings which they dont have any authority to give because their priesthood was removed with the temple… but go ahead protestants pretend this is a good thing!
Here's a poem I wrote specially for you, @joboww:
Sad thou art for not everyone obeyeth the great whore? Me doest thinketh that thou protesteth protestants with much angst. Wherefore hast thou acquired thy affliction; from whence springs thine enmity? Cry, cry, cry, moan, moan, moan, goest the little old Cath-o-lic.
O persecutor of His Body and depredator of Kingdom riches, thou canst not see what thou hast wrought? Verily thou who cleanst the tomb and painteth the dome hast external beauty. But thy heart is pitched in wickedness; flesh thine only resort. Cry, cry, cry, moan, moan, moan, goest the little old Cath-o-lic.
Finery obscures thy sight and righteousness is thy thin cover. Mortality only seest the outside; it is God who seest the heart. Thou who claimest sovereign absolution walkest not upright - thou art a crippled, blind man. Working, striving, striding towards the ever extended goal, never to attain, never to fulfill. Cry, cry, cry, moan, moan, moan, goest the little old Cath-o-lic.
Ostentation thine chosen quill, iniquity thine chosen well. Adding, revising, excising, and redacting the Book that forbiddest amends, thy church comprehendeth no sins. Scribing "traditions" the Master did not commend, the Babylonian whore endureth to the end.
Whence from the sky, the Lord shall command
That mighty angel: "Throw thy stone in the ocean"
Thus shall the whore ever be smitten, never to arise again.
And then the Cath-o-lic shall truly cry, cry, cry, moan, moan, moan.
job - The High priest was Aaron, now the only High Priest is +Jesus who is God+ & +Jesus is in the tabernacle in Heaven+ right now.
You walk a very fine line of blaspheming the Holy Spirit; tread carefully when you attribute a holy gift of God to Satan.
"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, he will not give him a snake, will he? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!" (Matthew 7:7-11 NASB).
God doesn't know how to give bad gifts, and if I have been baptized in the Holy Spirit, the definite evidence of having been filled is speaking in tongues as the Spirit gives the utterance. It's not my mind making up syllables and sounds; the Spirit is giving the language so my spirit can exalt the Lord and speak the "wonderful works of God," according to Acts 2:11. If the speaking in tongues is of Satan, then it's the only thing I know of which gives me a deep yearning for Jesus, to want more of Jesus.
Now, I do believe Satan has counterfeits, but those can be discerned by authentically Spirit-filled Believers, especially in an atmosphere of corporate worship - they'll stick out like a sore thumb, because their spirit isn't in sync with the flow of worship and the will be a tension that's discernable.
Please, can I get you to watch this video of a worship service conducted with the express interest of Believers being baptized in the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongues?: http://sonlifetv.com/archives.html?video_uuid=xko1rrr2&categoryId=57261 This is from April 5, 2015 so it's only a week old. Please watch this! And, in the interest of transparency and equity, I would like you to find a video of similar length, but which lays out the opposite case. Then we can meet back here and discuss it. I really want you to experience what Pentecost is like, because it is a refreshing river to the unslaked soul.
January 16, 2015 at 11:04am
Nancy Pelosi has excommuicated herself along with all others that support abortion. This is a simple matter of Canon Law that provides a simple framework for all in the Church. A person need not be handed a specific document from the vatican to verify they are excommunicated, that is usually reserved to clerics (Luther) and heads of state (kings/presidents). Instead of issuing non stop excommunications from the Vatican itself the church relies on subsidiary to point out that it is the local bishops responsibility to administer the Sacraments. A Bishop can fail here, as well as priests, but the fact she has excommunicated herself is a matter of canon law, not of emotions or indifferentism or even a false sense of mercy.
November 7, 2014 at 11:10pm
A question to Protestants and the orthodox for that matter
If contraception is ok for you what is wrong with the same sex attracted people and their disordered passions? Objectively speaking, according to the natural law both are disorders like bulimia
As a True Christian I can answer that. See, God is grossed out and bothered by the same stuff I am. I don't mind so much about condoms and birth control - it's not that gross. But when a man loves another man - that is gross. Woman get a pass if they are cute however.
Contraceptives can be used for more than birth control. For women with certain health related problems they can have other effects. Marriage isn't merely for procreation, and neither is sex. It is scripturally supposed to be between a married man and woman though. The argument that it goes against natural law flies in the face of scientific evidence that dolphins and other animals including ones genetically close to us sometimes choose to have sex for pleasure rather than for procreation. This lends credence to the theory that God intended sex to have a twofold purpose. It was a gift created to unite man and wife as one flesh, when done in love it creates a spiritual bond, that is how it differs from homosexuality. God made Eve from Adam, males and females are two incomplete halves of the same whole being. A man and a man or a woman and a woman, are two halves of different wholes, the same half of another whole to be more specific. You can't take two front halves of separate machines, hook them up and have them work as intended. I'll never support post conception birth control however, as that is murder.
 November 7, 2014 at 11:03pm
@combative that’s circular reasoning. The Catholic Church canonized the scriptures in the 300′s because it had and continues to have the authority to loose and bind on all who call themselves christian
 November 5, 2014 at 11:37am
@combative if that’s what you think why are you against purgatory? When you say instantly you mean there is a quick moment of purifying which is compatible with the teaching so why the semantics?
 November 5, 2014 at 11:33am
Right so why follow the traditions Luther Calvin and others instituted 1500 years later by their own interpretation of the bible which the proceeded to change by taking out books without objective authority to do so? Our traditions are apostolic and come from the lips of Christ. As Paul says follow the traditions handed down whether they are by epistle for oral
[-1] November 5, 2014 at 11:27am
So the Maccabees were pagan now and so are the Jews. Ok you are very studied