On 5-7-2009 16:19, Warp wrote:
> andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> BTW you forgot 
>> to shed doubt on the church part. Now we could read it as a confession 
>> that you are member of a church. ;)
> 
>   In fact, I'm not.

Oh no, you shouldn't say that either. ;)

>>>   There were clearly wrong assumptions being made in the video. For example,
>>> there's no claim in the bible, literal or metaphorical, that people who
>>> believe in God and are saved never divorce. I don't even remember hearing
>>> any christian making such claim. (Well, I'm sure that there exist people
>>> who make all kinds of claims, eg. that if two people divorce they are not
>>> "true" christians, or whatever. But that's not what any mainstream christian
>>> church teaches.)
> 
>> Matthew 19:1-12 especially 19:6
> 
>   That's a command, not a promise. It commands that people should not
> divorce. It doesn't promise that people won't want to divorce. If you
> read the next verses you'll see a direct admission of that: People *do*
> divorce, even if God has put them together, and that's why some laws were
> put in place for those occasions.
> 
>   If the bible made any kind of promise that people who believe in God
> won't even divorce, why would there be any need for such laws?

I can only assume that you contrasting commands and promises relates to 
some theology that I am not familiar with. It appears that your claim 
that it is a 'clearly wrong assumption' that Christians should not 
divorce somehow rests on this distinction. So enlighten me.

>   The video asks a very loaded question: "Why do christians get divorced
> at the same rate as non-christians?" It's a loaded question because it
> assumes that the bible or christians teach that God doesn't allow christians
> to divorce.

Actually He wouldn't. He accepts it reluctantly only when one party has 
already broken it's vows. Which is sort of logical because the unity of 
the two people has already been compromised.
> Nowhere is there such a promise. 

there is that promise again.

> On the contrary, it's readily
> admitted in the bible that people divorce even though God wouldn't want
> them to.

Also note that Jesus here overrules Moses, at least that is how I read it.

>   I suppose the correct answer to the question would be: "Because people
> don't always follow God's will." 

And that is, I think, the point the guy is trying to make. That God 
forbids it has zero effect on the Christians. As such it is a 
reiteration of the well known fact that even the people who say they 
take the bible literally still pick and choose what suits them. Again, 
apparently a century ago this command was in the set of things to follow 
and now it has joined the food-laws. Another reason for inclusion might 
be that this change has take place within living memory (just as the 
acceptability of gays and unmarried living together here in the 
Netherlands), but I think I might be grossly overestimating the 
intelligence of the creator of this video with that.

> The answer the video gives to the question
> is inconsequential.

What answer? I didn't see one. There is only the somewhat over the top 
'To explain this, you have to create some convoluted rationalization'

Post a reply to this message