Shammah Worm

“Deep Strength” Doubles Down On His Lies

This post is about another blogger’s false teachings on divorce and remarriage which he continues to propagate even after being repeatedly corrected. It references months worth of material contained on multiple posts from the locations listed below. If you haven’t read them and the comments, then you likely won’t be able to follow my responses to his most recent post.

https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/12/18/on-divorce/
https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2015/09/02/on-divorce-part-2/
https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2015/12/11/on-divorce-part-3/
https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2016/09/15/on-divorce-part-4/
https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2016/10/15/divorce-advocates-are-the-same-as-egalitarians/

The Lord’s teachings on divorce and remarriage are simple and clear.

Matthew 19: 9, “And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

A man has the right to divorce his wife and remarry in cases of sexual immorality. This includes adultery. This is clear because the Greek word porneia, which is the word translated as sexual immorality in the above verse is used in the same way in the below passage. Note how incestuous adultery is used as a specific example of porneia.

1 Corinthians 5: 1, “It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father’s wife.”

“Deep Strength’s” blatant dishonesty regarding the scriptures in order to continue to impose false burdens on men who are seeking help and sound doctrine has shown he is the opposite of his handle. So I will once again parrot the truth.
“1. If Jesus meant adultery and divorce then he would’ve been agreeing with the Pharisees. Jesus simply doesn’t do this ever.”

This is an outright lie. Jesus doesn’t agree with the Pharisees because the Pharisees weren’t teaching that a man could divorce only for sexual immorality and were instead twisting scripture to create all sorts of other reasons for divorce which the scriptures don’t allow. “Deep Strength” is falsely representing the teaching of the Pharisees in order to contradict the clear teaching of Christ.

“2. The disciples did not respond like he was agreeing with the Pharisees and instead thought that it’s better not to marry. Men could already divorce for adultery: this would not be a reason the disciples thought Jesus was crazy.”

The reason why the disciples were shocked is because divorce happened for reasons other than sexual immorality in the Old Testament scriptures. It also meant divorce wasn’t allowed for numerous “good” reasons such as idolatry or betrayal(See what Samson’s first Philistine wife did to him for example).

“3. Textual context of the words being used.”

Much of the “context” is a fantasy made up by “Deep Strength” in order to force the scriptures to fit his false teachings. The real context was discussed in detail.

“4. Mary/Joseph example of Deut 22, 1 Cor 5 example of illicit marriage (incest).”

Here “Deep Strength” lies about two passages of scripture. Deut. 22 did not give an option to divorce and required death if a girl was found to have falsely represented her virginity at the consummation of the marriage. Joseph didn’t make any attempt to consummate the marriage to Mary and therefore the situation in Deut. 22 never came up. “Deep Strength” lies regarding 1 Cor 5: 1 by claiming it refers to an illicit marriage when in reality the passage describes incestuous adultery. It doesn’t talk about illicit marriage at all.

“5. Distinction of putting away in the same passage and Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Malachi.”

Jesus says a man may “put away” and remarry in cases of sexual immorality so this is a moot point. But it should be pointed out that “Deep Strength” has shown a greater concern for whether or not the man in Malachi wrote a certificate of divorce instead of whether or not the man was dealing treacherously with the wife of his youth. Here “Deep Strength” chooses to neglect the weightier issues of the law in a futile attempt to affirm his false doctrines.

“6. The trick question context.”

The trick question has been shown over and over again to be a work of fiction originating in the mind of “Deep Strength” and not from historical, Roman occupied Judea. At no point was Jesus asked a trick question by Jewish leaders to try and get Him to contradict Roman law or to trap Him in a Roman law vs Jewish law dichotomy. Jews weren’t considered Roman and were allowed to set many of their own laws. This included divorce.

“7. Lack of agreement with Mark 10 and Luke 16.”

As “Deep Strength” already knows, the Jews were under the laws of the Old Testament which required adulteresses to be executed. The only time it was possible to divorce for adultery is when the witnesses required to convict for adultery couldn’t be provided. Roman occupation in no way changed this commandment.

“8. Early Church did not permit divorce or remarriage. They were the ones who heard it from the mouth of Jesus.”

The early church did permit divorce and remarriage in cases of sexual immorality because that’s what the scriptures actually say. The teaching in Matthew IS the teaching of the early church fathers. ALL “Christian” writing and positions that contradict the Bible are false regardless of who the person was who wrote it or what their supposed connections to the early apostles were.

“4. Lack of reference to the ideal: “what God has put together let man not separate” — if divorce was allowed by Jesus then it’s still hard hearted to do it.”

Jesus Christ aka God in the flesh stated plainly a man may divorce and remarry for sexual immorality. It is no sin. Deut. 24 makes it clear that a man is separated from a woman he divorced who has married another person to such an extent that he is committing “an abomination before the Lord” if he were to take her back.

“Deep Strength” thinks Jesus Christ would permit something that’s hard-hearted and therefore sinful. I suspect he has far bigger theological problems than the “no divorce ever” heresy.

I’ll close this out by saying what I said in the comment section from one of his last posts.
“The ‘no divorce ever’ lie is easily the most perverse lie of churchianity propagated in the manosphere which seeks to lay up enormous false, heavy burdens on men that they have no obligation to bear. A lot of people on here understandably don’t have the energy to answer all the “no divorce ever” heresies and just take Christ at his word(Matt. 5 and 19). The problem is some men, especially those who are new or who have pastors with false doctrine need more of an explanation than that. For that reason, I’ll take the time away from my other reading and writing to answer.”

Advertisements

DS’ False Divorce Teaching

It’s unfortunate it’s come to this. But I’m forced to bring up “Deep Strength’s” false divorce teaching. I put his name in quotes because he’s resorted to removing my latest warning and correction to his lies. I say lies because he’s been repeatedly shown information which he ignores and attempts to contradict. The “no divorce ever” lie must be exposed for the sake of sound doctrine. It’s vital to understanding God’s relationship to His body and to alleviate false, heavy burdens imposed by churchianity.

The information is in the comments of his posts themselves as well as my own past posts on this blog. As of right now, he’s only removed the below post. You can find my full range of posts at https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2015/09/02/on-divorce-part-2/

and

https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2015/12/11/on-divorce-part-3/

Should he delete my other responses, I’ll post them here. Below is the post which was deleted. This post is part of a longer conversation over multiple posts.

“December 16, 2015 at 4:35 pm

They’re not debunked at all. You’re lying and you know it.

1 Corinthians 5: 1, “It is actually reported that there is SEXUAL IMMORALITY(porneia) among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father’s wife.”

Porneia as you’ve been shown and you even admit, includes adultery. I’ll post what was already written back on October 29th.

“There are no distinguishing words. As you’ve been shown many times, the reason why Jesus uses porneia instead of adultery is because a man has the right to divorce his wife if she lied about her sexual history AND also for adultery. If a man is married to a woman for decades and finds out she lied about her sexual history before she was married to him, he has the right to divorce and remarry.”

That’s why Jesus uses “fornication/sexual immorality” instead of “adultery.” You know this. The error you’re making is akin to saying abortion isn’t murder because the term murder is used instead of abortion.

“Put away” is synonymous with divorce in the Greek. Even it it’s not, Jesus still says a man can “put away” for sexual immorality and that means a man can put away for adultery.”

A Correction

It’s been brought to my attention that the post titled “Yes, There is Biblical Divorce and Remarriage” contains some portions which imply Matthew 19 applies to women as much as men. Such as this paragraph,

“These passages demonstrate that in cases of sexual sin a man has the right to divorce his wife. He also has the right to marry another wife. It’s not adultery. God recognizes divorce in the case of fornication. He also recognizes remarriage of the wronged party in such cases. He recognizes divorce and remarriage in these cases the same way He recognizes divorce and remarriage of a new convert who was abandoned by an unbelieving spouse.”

To be clear. Matthew 19 applies to men only. My apologies to anyone to whom this has caused problems. Women DO NOT have the right of divorce that men do. I don’t think a woman who’s a believer can remarry if she’s divorced from a husband who’s a believer while he is still alive. Upon further study, it appears the only occasion where a woman can remarry while her ex is still alive is in the case of a new convert who’s divorced by her unbelieving husband. She DOES NOT have the right to initiate divorce.

1 Corinthians 7: 15, “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

Unless bondage means something other than marriage, this verse seems pretty straight forward.

2 Verses Which Make Biblical Divorce and Remarriage Clear

Here are two simple verses for anyone who isn’t in the mood to read my post on biblical divorce and remarriage. Yes, there is biblical divorce and remarriage.

1 Corinthians 5: 1(KJV), “It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.

Adultery IS fornication.

Matthew 19: 9(KJV), “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Jesus is without a doubt including adultery when He says “fornication.” Anyone who rejects this definition of “fornication” must also reject the KJV of the Bible. The reason why Jesus says fornication and not adultery is because a man also has the right to divorce a woman who’s lied about her sexual history – even if they’ve been married for decades.

Porneia(translated as “fornication”) has never at any point meant only premarital sex. It’s always included adultery. Anyone who reads this and continues to propagate the falsehood that adultery isn’t grounds for divorce is lying. A man has the right to divorce and remarry in cases of sexual sin. No pastor or elders have the authority to tell him no once sexual sin is established.

Thank the Lord Jesus for His Gift of Our Nation

From some very non-Christian men came a free, prosperous society in which the church flourished. Glory, glory, glory to the Lord God almighty. Who was, who is and who is to come.

Yes, There is Biblical Divorce and Remarriage

EDIT: October 11, 2014

Please read my post titled “A Correction” before reading this. Matthew 19 applies to men. Not women, despite any language in this post which would suggest otherwise. Women DO NOT appear to have a right of divorce and remarriage.

There are certain teachings prevalent in many Christian circles which claim there is no Biblical divorce and remarriage. While these groups rightly expose the sin of the frivolous divorce epidemic in the West, they also fail to acknowledge God’s sanctioning of Biblical divorce and remarriage in cases of sexual sin. ‘No!” They’ll say. “There’s never ever grounds for divorce and anyone who remarries in such a case is committing adultery!”

This is a false teaching and is contradicted by the direct words of Christ Himself. While it’s never good to look at individual passages of scripture by themselves, there are certain instances in which a single passage so clearly debunks false doctrines spanning entire books and sermons that it’s enough. Such is the case with this teaching. Divorce and remarriage is Biblical in cases of sexual sin. The following entry will show this to be the case based on the King James Version of the Bible.

Matthew 19 contains such a passage. In verse 3, the Pharisees pose the question, “Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?” Note the context. They are asking if divorce for ANY reason is lawful. It’s clear that they are asking about divorce in cases of marriages which are already consummated. Hence, the answer Jesus gives is in regard to both consummated and unconsummated marriages. It includes marriages in which the man and woman are already joined together in one flesh. This is vital in understanding Christ’s answer.

“4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.”

Those who claim there isn’t Biblical divorce like to point to verse 8 and say that all divorce is a result of hardness of heart and is therefore unbiblical. But they neglect two things.

1) They forget the question Jesus is being asked. He isn’t being asked if just divorce for sexual sin is allowed. He’s being asked if divorce for ANY REASON is allowed. Under Levitical law, adulterers had to be killed(Leviticus 20: 10). A man following the law wouldn’t even be able to divorce an unfaithful wife at the time of Christ unless there weren’t enough witnesses to convict her of adultery. The same is the case for a newly married woman(Deuteronomy 22: 20-21). This means “hardness of heart” is referring to other problems in a marriage besides just a bitter(which is sin) husband. Letting go of bitterness in no way implies that there are no consequences for marital unfaithfulness. It’s possible to both forgive and to divorce at the same time. Divorce is often an earthly consequence of adultery the same way being fired from a job is often the earthly consequence for theft.

2) They ignore the following verse(9) in which Jesus makes a special distinction between fornication(sexual sin) with divorce for other reasons. Not only does he make a special distinction for divorce in cases of fornication, but He also makes it clear that a man who remarries in such a case isn’t guilty of adultery.

Critics will try to add to the word of God and say that fornication only refers to premarital sex and divorce can only occur before the marriage is consummated if it’s discovered the woman isn’t a virgin on her wedding night.

Deuteronomy 22: 20-21, “But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: 21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.”

The law commands any woman falsely representing her chastity on the night her marriage is to be consummated be put to death. It doesn’t just give the man the option to put her to death. If Joseph had taken Mary and attempted to consummate the marriage, he would have been compelled to have her executed if it turned out she wasn’t a virgin. What this means is the scenarios people give for divorce couldn’t have even taken place because a faithful Jew would have had to report a non-virgin to the priests and she would be executed. This means the answer Christ gives about divorce applies to all cases of sexual sin and includes instances in which the man and woman have cleaved to one another. It also demonstrates why Christ doesn’t mention divorce for cases of sexual sin in Mark and Luke(He hadn’t yet pardoned the adulteress woman described in John). It’s because it would have been very difficult for a man in His time to have even been in a situation in which he could’ve biblically divorced.

Fornication needs to be defined. Multiple dictionaries define it as “sex between unmarried persons” or “sex between people who are not married to each other.” So we must ask a simple question: are two people in an adulterous relationship married to each other? No, they aren’t. Therefore, adultery IS fornication. It’s always been fornication. However, fornication is more than adultery. Premarital sex without a doubt fits the definition above and is therefore also fornication. Adultery is fornication the same way Baal worship is idolatry. Critics will say that because adultery and fornication are listed separately in passages like Galatians 5: 19 they are different.

But lets read the actual passage. Galatians 5: 19-21, “19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”

Many of these sins overlap with one another. For example, we know that hating one’s brother in one’s heart is murder. Yet, they’re both listed separately. Does this mean hating your brother in your heart is different than murdering him? Nope. In no way does the listing of the two words together imply that they don’t overlap or that they can’t both be committed with a single act. Adultery IS fornication. It’s sex between unmarried persons.

Many other versions of the Bible such as the ESV have been criticized for translating porneia(the Greek word used in Matthew 19) as sexual immorality instead of fornication. However, these critics fail to realize that the word fornication itself has been used as a broad term to describe sexual immorality throughout history.

Deuteronomy 24: 1 reads, “When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.”

This is one of the passages the Pharisees were referencing with Jesus. Note that in order for a man to send his wife out of his house requires that she be living with him first. Which in turn means they had consummated the marriage. Note that the law is only giving the man the right to divorce his wife in the case of “uncleanness.” This means it has to be a case of actual uncleanness and not just a random reason concocted by the man himself. Being a nag or overcooking dinner isn’t uncleanness and is therefore not grounds for divorce as the Pharisees were implying. Even supposedly “good” reasons for divorce like a contentious woman(Proverbs 27: 15) aren’t biblical. And this is why the apostles were shocked.

This law could only apply in cases of actual uncleanness such as adultery(without the witnesses to convict) or deception in regard to her sexual history. Things like being unhealthy, annoying, barren or unattractive isn’t uncleanness and is therefore not grounds for divorce. This is what Jesus said the law meant and this is what He reiterated when He distinguished between a man who divorced for fornication from one who did it for any other reason. Again, this meant that under the law, it was almost impossible to ever have grounds for divorce in His time.

These passages demonstrate that in cases of sexual sin a man has the right to divorce his wife. He also has the right to marry another wife. It’s not adultery. God recognizes divorce in the case of fornication. He also recognizes remarriage of the wronged party in such cases. He recognizes divorce and remarriage in these cases the same way He recognizes divorce and remarriage of a new convert who was abandoned by an unbelieving spouse.

A number of common arguments critics of Matthew 19: 9 often use are summarized and addressed below.

“Love your wife as Christ loved the church. So you can never, ever divorce.”
The church is the body of Christ(1 Corinthians 12: 27 and many other passages). And the body of Christ is His bride. It’s IMPOSSIBLE for the body of Christ to be unfaithful. The body of Christ is the collective body of believers. There are always faithful believers around the world who make up Christ’s virgin bride. When we sin we are the Lord’s disobedient children and not His unfaithful wife. Hence the reason why Jesus tells the parable of the prodigal son and not the prodigal wife. This means the entire analogy of Christ and His church has broken down when a husband or wife commits sexual sin. Also recall in Zechariah 11: 10-11, God breaks his covenant with the people.

“Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 7: 11, ‘But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.'”
In cases of fornication, God recognizes the divorce and the woman who’s been sent away is no longer considered the man’s wife. Paul is talking about instances of divorce other than fornication the same way “thou shalt not kill” is referring to instances other than self-defense. Just because extenuating circumstances aren’t named in every portion of scripture dealing with larger teachings in no way implies they don’t exist. The same way many critics try to alter the reading of Matthew 19 by pointing to Mark and Luke is used by liberal “denominations” to explain away the existence of hell.

It must again be stated that God recognizes divorces which are due to fornication and a couple who is divorced because of that are no longer man and wife. Hence, a woman who’s been divorced for this reason cannot be considered a “wife” anymore. That Paul speaks of a wife being reconciled to her husband makes it clear he isn’t talking about divorces in the case of sexual sin.

A number of other passages in Paul’s writings discuss physical separations and command reconciliation. Again, it’s implicit that these passages aren’t discussing instances of fornication and divorce because they are still called husband and wife.

Anyone who reads this should either show via the scriptures this understanding to be false or change their doctrine to the correct teachings regarding divorce. Fornication has NEVER, EVER meant only premarital sex. It has always meant sex outside of marriage. It also includes other activities which aren’t intercourse. Sodomy, oral sex and other physical acts would be referred to as fornication at the time of King James. Details of cases such as the Monica Lewinsky debacle would never have even been publicly discussed in that time.

If anyone continues to peddle false doctrines about divorce and remarriage never being permitted in cases of sexual sin, they’re knowingly altering the Word of God and furthering a lie. They’re laying up heavy burdens on the brothers. Divorce and Remarriage have and continue to be Biblical in cases of sexual sin. A man is allowed to divorce his wife for sexual sin. He can also remarry the same way a newly converted believer who’s been abandoned by an unbelieving spouse can.

The Mystery of Lawlessness

This is an attempt to explain or define the mystery of lawlessness mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2. This was originally intended to be included in the “Good From God, Not God From Good” entry. Please read it if you haven’t already.

With that in mind, let’s consider the passage where it’s described. 2 Thessalonians 2:
“Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

Who is the Truth? Jesus Christ. As he Himself says in John 14: 6: “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'” Jesus also says in John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.”

The preceding scripture then establishes two facts:
1) Jesus is God
2) There is no other way to God besides Jesus. To put it another way, you must do what Jesus commands to not be condemned. 2 Thessalonians: 12 makes it clear that all who do not believe the truth(the word of God) will be condemned.

The full significance of this is told to us by Christ Himself in Matthew 22:
“And he said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.’”

Belief in, submission to and continuous worship of Christ is not only the most important purpose in the life of a human being, but the basis for all other commandments in the scripture.

Hence when a person rejects Christ, he rejects God and His law. Commandments such as love thy neighbor or thou shalt not kill are all dependent upon the greatest commandment. Rejecting Christ is a rejection of these lesser commandments as well. Those who speak as if it were possible to follow God’s lesser commandments without first worshiping Him are guilty of blasphemy because they imply righteousness exists apart from God instead of because of God.

This means a person can mimic Christ’s lesser teachings and be in complete disobedience to Christ. A person who appears to be following the golden rule while refusing to worship Christ is lawless because he is not following the greatest commandment upon which the golden rule depends.

What then is the mystery of lawlessness? Rejection of Christ aka a rejection of God. The mystery of lawlessness was already at work in the time of Paul. We are told this plainly in 2 Thessalonians. And just as people rejected Christ in the time of Paul so too are they rejecting Christ in our time.

The mystery of lawlessness is at work when a person says he can be “good without God.” We hear it, see it and read it all the time. It is time for the True Christians to separate from people and groups who espouse this false doctrine. We must warn all people and groups with whom we associate about the seriousness of this. Any “church” or “pastor” who peddles this must repent or perish. Christ is the cornerstone. DO NOT support any person or group who blasphemes Him.