In Reply to: Re: Some funneling posted by Farmer on February 10, 2010 at 19:22:05:
both partners/mates...married afterwards again...nevertheless I was also guilty before of Mt. 5:28, plus adultery/fornication on both sides while in TF...that road/argumentation would be futile IMO...a dead-end-street...others try to seek their "fortune" in the difference of porneia /fornication in Mt. 5:32 & Mt. 19:9 and adultery...some claiming it refers to something before marriage or some uncleanliness (near to kin relationship etc.) etc....In any "normal case"...since all that doesn't/wouldn't apply anyway to me...the supreme way in NT/marriage IMO is the one of seeking and granting forgiveness etc...
I blocked all other futile argumentations out of my head...for originally they became one, Jesus said...one flesh...even the conjunctions in the subclause/sentence could lead to an unpromising situation (the Greek could allow to interpret Jesus saying:...not to talk now about fornication), also the positioning of the subsentence...having lead me to the "safe" interpretation, that seperation is ok, Paul backing that in (1.Cor. 7), but nowhere the remarriage is explicitely (emphasis) mentioned.
I really "calculated" that up and down to come to a "more favourable" result...you can try it....there's an UK-theologian something with Ingersoll...very popular...he argues pro...I haven't read his book...but I am sure now, I won't need it to have better arguments...some resort to saying that Mt. argues the case for the Jews...Mark for the Romans and Luke for the rest or so...in the parallel-verses...not very convincing to me.There is no difference in Christ...why then in the matter of marriage???
Big subject altogether...five years ago I dedicated months to it...so right now I consider it a closed book for me.