Message from @Priyanka
Discord ID: 567191099098136596
This simply refers to divorce. To put away your wife to marry another.
this also carries over to take on multiple wives
How do you compatibilise such a teaching with other verses where God clearly condones polygamy?
“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’[b]? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
"So they are no longer two, but one flesh" - what part of this is hard to understand?
I don't regard that as an argument for monogamy.
supersessionism is the common interpretation
That's hyper-literalism, reading into the text something you wish to read.
Concubinage isn't even about monogamy. You're not marrying concubines.
Also, I don't accept Rand's observations being a non-Christian.
They're literally mistresses.
that's adultery.
The Bible makes it clear adultery is bad
Jesus replaces the old covenant with the new
I don't see the old and new being different in substance.
it is by the christian viewpoint
Covenantalism is a pretty old biblical position.
Older than the one you're currently espousing.
Again you're not a Christian. I'm not going to accept your arguments, heathen.
its the leading viewpoint amongst christians
How can a non-believer be expected to interpret inspired texts?
well someone who is Christian seems to be typing
Should change your role to Jewish if you worship the Old Testament
[1] Now concerning the thing whereof you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. [2] But for fear of fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. [3] Let the husband render the debt to his wife, and the wife also in like manner to the husband. [4] The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband. And in like manner the husband also hath not power of his own body, but the wife. [5] Defraud not one another, except, perhaps, by consent, for a time, that you may give yourselves to prayer; and return together again, lest Satan tempt you for your incontinency.
>[2] "Have his own wife": That is, keep to his wife, which he hath. His meaning is not to exhort the unmarried to marry: on the contrary, he would have them rather continue as they are. (Ver. 7: 8.) But he speaks here to them that are already married; who must not depart from one another, but live together as they ought to do in the marriage state.
>6] But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment. [7] For I would that all men were even as myself: but every one hath his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that. [8] But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I. [9] But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt. [10] But to them that are married, not I but the Lord commandeth, that the wife depart not from her husband.
I like both Old and New Testamentts.
The Bible isn't about what you like and your feelings.
^
Is Paul wrong?
^
Don't give me a flood of text, Persephone.
Read it loser
Also, your admin is a heathen.
You should be familiar with these verses.
lol
Worshipping your admin boy when he's a non-believer.
A look at the first few words of these verses should tell you what those verses are, if you're actually a Christian.