jasoncran said:
Ive been in a debate elsewhere that has been going on for months now where this guy tries to twist the intent of the exception clauses to make them say something they dont.
The exceptions are used by both sides....both EXTREMES, I should say....to create godless error that doesnt line up with the whole, nor does it agree with Gods character overall.
Its VERY easy to see in the ENTIRE bible that God is VERY protective over the wife....but these godless doctrines end up doing to her EXACTLY what the hardhearted Jews did in the OT but making even an innocent wife unable to remarry if her dog husband beats, rapes, cheats and then ditches her.
The Jews perverted the intent of the writ that was actually given to REGULATE the abuse by the husband of his wife,....they twisted it into a permission or instruction TO divorce for this 'uncleanness' when that wasnt the intent at all.....then in doing so all they had to do was say that it ONLY applied to the man and then refuse to give her the writ when they cast her out.
This basically meant that this woman was UNABLE to REmarry as Moses had SAID she could do in Deut 24....pretty vile, huh ?
So now shes out on the street and a number of these woman would have had to have turned to other 'means' to survive, not excluding prostitution.
And now we have the shads of the world doing the EXACT same thing to the wife.
Her husband beats, rapes and cheats...the ditches here and then shad tells her sorry, you cant remarry...even tho YOU have been a PeRFECT and INNOCENT wife.
I find it VERY telling when a mans doctrine does to an innocent woman EXACTLY what the hardhearted Jews did to her.
;)