Originally Posted by PeterG

Again:
μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ = "except porneia" and the same as: εἰ μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ
"even for porneia" would be: ἐάν τε ἕνεκα πορνείας

Originally Posted by bearbear

Yes, Dr. McFall's point is that we have moved off of Erasmus Greek text for English translation with the exception of Matthew 19:9 which is inconsistent.

1. μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ = “not for fornication”
μὴ is a negative particle meaning “not.”

This phrase limits or qualifies an action:

“Whoever divorces his wife, not for fornication, and marries another, commits adultery.”

It excludes fornication as a valid reason to remarry:

Even if you divorce not for fornication (i.e., for any other reason), remarriage is adultery.

εἰ μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ = “except for fornication”
εἰ μὴ means “if not” or “except.”

This creates an exception clause, meaning:

“Whoever divorces his wife, except for fornication, and marries another, commits adultery.”

This reading permits divorce and remarriage if the divorce was because of fornication.



It's important to get this right depending on your soteriology because Paul says adulterers will not inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Corinthians 6:9–10
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Originally Posted by PeterG

“Not for” (μὴ ἐπὶ) and “if not for” (εἰ μὴ ἐπὶ) make no difference in meaning. And both want to say: "except for". New Testament exegesis is no longer based on Erasmus anyway.

Originally Posted by Nell

This discussion has also strayed, not only from the topic, but from forum principal Local Church Discussions. Both will soon be closed to further posting.

Nell and UntoHim
Admins/Moderators

Originally Posted by Raptor

Quick note. This whole idea that Matthew (or portions of Matthew) was written for Jews only is nonsense, confusing and dangerous. There is no Scriptural basis for this teaching.

Originally Posted by PeterG

Certainly not, since Erasmus didn't speak any English. He translated the then-known Greek text into Latin.

Originally Posted by bearbear

Jesus said in John 12:47-48 that his words will judge us in the day of judgment:
“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.

Originally Posted by Nell

Bearbear,

I think this topic may lend itself to a closer look at "logos" and "rhema". This was helpful to me:

https://search.brave.com/search?q=lo...77e9a79dd0dee2

Logos vs Rhema
In Christian theology, logos and rhema are two Greek terms often discussed in the context of understanding the Word of God. While both are translated as "word" in English, they carry distinct meanings and applications.

Logos: This term refers to the universal, written Word of God. It encompasses the entirety of Scripture and is often associated with divine reason or the person of Jesus Christ, who is described as the Word (Logos) made flesh in John 1. Logos represents the foundational truths of the Bible that are applicable to all believers.

Rhema: This term denotes a specific, living application of the Word to an individual or situation. Rhema is often described as a "spoken word" or a divine insight that the Holy Spirit imparts to a person's heart, making the general truth of the logos personally relevant and actionable. For example, while the logos may contain the promise of salvation, the rhema might be the moment an individual feels the assurance that this promise applies directly to them [3]. Some theologians emphasize that logos is like a well of water, representing the complete Scriptures, while rhema is like a bucket of water drawn from that well, representing a specific truth made alive in a believer's life.

Others argue that the distinction between logos and rhema is not always clear-cut, as both terms can overlap in meaning depending on the context in which they are used.

In summary, logos is often seen as the objective, written Word of God, while rhema is understood as the subjective, living application of that Word through the Holy Spirit.

Key: Living application of the word through the Holy Spirit. It's important to have a living relationship with the Lord, i.e., the Holy Spirit. That is, the written word does not cover all life situations. Much has been written about divorce, but still the Holy Spirit has something to say to your heart. This is why Paul prayed, in Phillipians 3, "that I may know him". It's likely that at the time Paul spoke this, there was no "Logos" but the believers relied on rhema until there was logos.

Just my thoughts--
Nell

Originally Posted by Nell

What did Jeremiah have to say about divorce in the Old Testament? Does this mean that God himself divorced the Northern Kingdom?
... (Jeremiah 3:8) And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce;