when did they start teaching this heresy

Again, show me the first instances of acceptance of divorce

I can show you, if you want, the writings of the father about it, and what Paul says

nice burden shuffling

Well.. Infertility was a reason for annulment back then wasn’t it?

For the royals that is

You say that "the orthodox say this"

But you can't point even where that comes from

Mega dab

It shouldn't have been @MawLr but royals stamp their feet and normally someone caves.

it points from it being there forever

```In 1439 the Council of Florencedefined marriage as a sacrament, solidifying the development of doctrine from the previous twelve centuries and described marriage as 'indisoluble' "since it signifies the indivisible union of Christ and the church." The passage follows, "Although the separation of bed is lawful on account of fornication, it is not lawful to contract another marriage since the bond of a legitimately contracted marriage is perpetual."```

whereas cathos only have it since 1439

From st augustine:

"Seeing that the compact of marriage is not done away by divorce intervening; so that they continue wedded persons one to another, even after separation; and commit adultery with those, with whom they shall be joined, even after their own divorce, either the woman with a man, or the man with a woman"

You have some nerve saying "only have it since 1439"

It is similar to those who believe some things were only believed since they were added to the Creed

Or those who say that Constantine made up Christianit

you have some nerve being unable to point out when the orthodox fell into heresy here

Again, I don't have to keep track of when other gorups start their heresies, why should I? What is supposed to be your argument?

Neither do we

But he answered you

I state something very simple: marriage can't be disolved, and this is supported by scripture, and said by the Fathers who talk about it. So the starting point for this position can be tracked back to them

lmao

third roman dab tag team continues

deviations from tradition and fathers are easy to see and point out

whereas you require me to prove that its always been that way

Wut?

I have pointed out what is the position of the Fathers

That is what I care about

Now your answer was "well, but who was the first who deviated?"

It was you who started that nonsensical discussion, I don't even know what the point is

the point is you got dabbed on son

What are you even talking about?

Are you high or something?

high on life

Good way to disengage

<:alex:557395954848759828>

remarriage was common practice in middle ages prior to the schism.
which means the Fathers would be discouraging, but not outlawing it.
but its tedious for me to prove the first point

whereas it would be trivial to prove the point at which the EO deviate

Matthew 5:32