N
Nella
Guest
The book of Sirach specifically states this. Do you or do you not believe this is error then?
- Status
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Divorce my friend is against God’s Law. Anyone who divorces commits adultery. The Catholic Church does not condon it.
Second, how does this relate to the Apocryhal Books. I have read all of them and None of them have errors. Protestants like yourself like to interpret these passages with your own private interpretation and distort in ways that make you fit your views. These books aren’t. They never were.
I do not even agree with the word. The books are Deutrocanonical Books not Apocrypal. Apocrypal Books are those written by the Gnostics who have the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Mary, etc.
D
dosdog
Guest
Judaism recognized the concept of “no-fault” divorce thousands of years ago. Judaism has always accepted divorce as a fact of life, albeit an unfortunate one. Judaism generally maintains that it is better for a couple to divorce than to remain together in a state of constant bitterness and strife.
jewfaq.org/divorce.htm
P
pyropam
Guest
Dear Nella, It is you who bashes constantly… I have read many things you have said on CAF…sad really that someone goes to so much trouble to argue…
Oh Lord, hear my prayer…take the anger from this person and fill them with love and understanding…Allow Nella to see your light!! Help Nella to stop trying to stir trouble and argue all the time… In Jesus Name I pray…AMEN
N
Nella
Guest
so what does that have to do with the RCC disallowing or should I say not recognizing the existence of divorce?
N
Nella
Guest
This is not true and you know it! Many many times I explained the differences in teachings between TEC and the worldwide church but yet you bash and bash. Come on, get real.
D
d_mccull_au
Guest
Nella,
You are qoting from an Old Testament book (Sirach) about the subject of divorce. As you should well know divorce was permitted in the Old Testament. It wasn’t until Jesus came that divorce was outlawed. So is this teaching in error? No! It is representative of the official teaching of God when it was written.
You are qoting from an Old Testament book (Sirach) about the subject of divorce. As you should well know divorce was permitted in the Old Testament. It wasn’t until Jesus came that divorce was outlawed. So is this teaching in error? No! It is representative of the official teaching of God when it was written.
D
dosdog
Guest
The inadmissibility of absolute divorce was ordained by Christ Himself according to the testimony of the Apostles and Evangelists: “Whoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if the wife shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery” (Mark 10:11, 12 – Cf. Matthew 19:9; Luke 16:18). In like manner, St. Paul: “To them that are married, not I but the Lord commandeth, that the wife depart not from her husband. And if she depart, she remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband. And let not the husband put away his wife” (1 Corinthians 7:10, 11). In these words Christ restored the original indissolubility of marriage as it had been ordained by God in the Creation and was grounded in human nature. This is expressly stated by Him against the Pharisees, who put forward the separation allowed by Moses: “Moses by reason of hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives”": but from the beginning it was not so" (Matthew 19:8); “He who made man from the beginning, made them male and female. And he said: For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder” (Matthew 19:4-6). The indissolubility of all marriage, not merely of Christian marriage, is here affirmed. The permanence of marriage for the whole human race according to natural law is here confirmed and ratified by a Divine positive ordinance.
newadvent.org/cathen/05054c.htm
D
d_mccull_au
Guest
Nella,
You are qoting from an Old Testament book (Sirach) about the subject of divorce. As you should well know divorce was permitted in the Old Testament. It wasn’t until Jesus came that divorce was outlawed. So is this teaching in error? No! It is representative of the official teaching of God when it was written.
You are qoting from an Old Testament book (Sirach) about the subject of divorce. As you should well know divorce was permitted in the Old Testament. It wasn’t until Jesus came that divorce was outlawed. So is this teaching in error? No! It is representative of the official teaching of God when it was written.
F
Fidelis
Guest
I answered this back in Post #3!
Are you here to sincerely question, or just to blindly bash?
1
1ke
Guest
I am not bashing anyone. I am stating the truth. All of these things are accepted within the Anglican Communion.
As long as churches espousing these doctrines reside IN the Anglican Communion, the Anglican Communion is resonsible for them and accepting the doctrines as compatible with the deposit of faith.
Kick them out, then we’ll have something to talk about.
G
Genesis315
Guest
Most of the arguments Protestants use agains the Deuterocanonical books are the same as the arguments atheists use against the other books of the Bible. It’s sad. 
J
juliamajor
Guest
Nella-faith and morals is what the bible is about .it is not history,science or social mores of the time book.As for your examples of “errors” pleez! There are hundreds of so called erors in the bibleh. How about"spare the rod spoil the child" -are we still supposed to beat our kids up?or"you shall not suffer a witch to live" do we go around killing witches? are we supposed to? These reflect social mores of the time- the Bible is a book written in Time.Faith and morals contained therein are timeless and inspired.but there is a lot of stuff in there that doesn’t effect faith at all. Besides the Bible is salvation history that should be seen in a totality As regards the Deuteros if You don’t consider them Sacred scripture- ok.But If you are a bible student- you should read them- they give a view of intertestament times- it will point you to what was going on ,what the hearts and minds of the Jewish people were feeling right before the birth of Christ. these are Valuable books and are studied by scholars everywhere and are considered by all Protestant bible scholars- as worthy of being read. If your theory were correct we should disregard the “didache” - a valuable insight to the early church -not in the Canon but considered by a major consensus of scholars to be authentic Apostolic teachings. There is nothing in the Deuteros that is contrary to faith or morals. there is nothing in there that is evil- it is not the work of the Devil
they are ancient and if you have a LXX you’ll see them in there- they are not medieval additions no matter what some people think.
they are ancient and if you have a LXX you’ll see them in there- they are not medieval additions no matter what some people think.
M
mercygate
Guest
Rahab lies for Joshua. Better take Joshua out of your Bible!
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
And not only that, she and her entire family are then ‘spared’. Not only is she a ‘prostitute’ (already wrong), she lies, she’s a traitor to her ‘own people’, and she and her family wind up okay while all the friends and neighbors, probably many of whom were living good solid ‘godly’ lives, were honest and truthful and faithful to their ‘own people’, wind up dead.
My oh my. Taking the passages in this “canon” scripture in the same narrowed and legalistic way you have applied toward the passages in Tobit, Nella. . .what ‘life lessons’ would you take HERE?
My oh my. Taking the passages in this “canon” scripture in the same narrowed and legalistic way you have applied toward the passages in Tobit, Nella. . .what ‘life lessons’ would you take HERE?
V
valient_Lucy
Guest
Divorce was outlined in the OT. Jesus said that God allowed divorce because “their hearts were hard.” Jesus declared that anyone who divorces their spouse and remarries commits adultery.
P
phil8888
Guest
Nella is there bashing Catholics all the time then asks people to stop bashing Anglicans, or Episcopalians, or Church of England… hard to keep track… all I know is that a LOT of people had to die because King Henry VIII wanted a divorce, so he wanted to start his own Church, and a huge lot of people who objected to this were tortured and killed. Great founder, Gotta love him!
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
AmenMost of the arguments Protestants use agains the Deuterocanonical books are the same as the arguments atheists use against the other books of the Bible. It’s sad.
M
mercygate
Guest
These kinds of challenges may have been honest at some point, but they appear on these forums as if taken uncritically from anti-Catholic sources.Most of the arguments Protestants use agains the Deuterocanonical books are the same as the arguments atheists use against the other books of the Bible. It’s sad.
The challenge about the word on divorce from Sirach, for example, could not have posted by a person with an elemental knowledge of the relationship between OT and Gospel teaching on the subject, as others on this thread have demonstrated.
Some people get sucked into this confusion because they assume that the Catholic position on any question must be wrong, and not only wrong but deliberately misleading.
Other people use these issues as a forum for exhibition of personality problems that would appear somewhere else if religion did not provide a convenient theater.
- Status