No sir, I don't. After reading it I think it's uninspired writing by someone caught twisting words to suit his own religion. But hey thats just me.
Let me clarify something too. When I said there are some things Jesus said I agree with and some I don't. I base my decision on what I can verify in Torah. Take divorce for instance.
Matthew 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
That is something I can agree with. It's in Torah.
But then in the next verse (Matthew 5:3)2 he is purported to have said something I can't find in Torah.
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Frankly the 'church' should do a study and find out why verse 32 of the Greek manuscripts and translation got inserted into the text and give some serious thought about how is it they can actually teach this. Because to be honest I doubt Jesus, being a Jewish man who had knowledge of and taught Torah would have ever said taught such a thing. That being said even after having read the Hebrew/English translation of Matthew I am unsure of what is being said concerning adultery as it appears fragmented as if some text is missing. However even though the Hebrew/English text is hard to understand one thing is certainly clear it in no way accuses a divorced woman or her new husband of adultery.
But when I read this Greek/English New Testement teaching. I found it contrary to God's torah, general human decency, as well as a crushing burden placed upon the shoulders of a divorced woman or a potential new husband. Correct me if I'm wrong but to me this teaching (v. 32) states a women is guilty of adultery simply because she was divorced by her husband for reasons other than fornication. Additionally, should she marry another man then they are both considered by your christian church guilty of adultery. That is utter nonsense, am I really expected to believe a divorced woman can be accused of adultery and expected to remain alone the rest of her life because any man fearing the same accusation would steer clear of such condemnation? On top of that all of this is because of the action of a former husband? I think not!
So, allow me to retort. The source for divorce is in Deuteronomy 24:1 which states: When a man has taken a wife, and married her, and it comes to pass that she finds no favor in his eyes, because he has 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. It goes on further and states in the very next verse this woman is now permitted to be another man's wife. Nothing makes any mention of repercussion, accusations, guilt, adultery or stoning.
According to Torah the woman is permitted to marry another man. Because the action and document of divorce dissolves the marriage covenant and relationship absolving both parties of any and all responsibilities to each other. She is, for lack of better words a 'free agent'. On a side note according to God's torah Deuteronomy 24:4 the man and woman if they reconcile their differences may marry again provided the woman had not since the divorce married or divorced another man.
It is my understanding of God's torah that adultery is when a man, married or not, takes another mans wife and lies with her. And it's very clear according to God's ways if a woman is not married whether it be from lack of opportunity, a desire not to be or has been given a bill of divorcement, she cannot in anyway shape or form be considered any man's wife. How then can someone say the woman who has been divorced or the man who might later marry her should be guilty of adultery? Furthermore Ezekiel 18 makes it very clear to me each individual is responsible for their own actions or inactions. Which brings me to another question? How can a former husband who no longer has any marital ties or responsibilities towards the woman be the cause of her sin?
Is it right to expect a women of spousal abuse to stay firm and take it throughout such a relationship? If she is divorced from her abuser for reasons other than fornication is the only other alternative now to live life accused of being an adulteress? Absolutely not! Some interpret Devarim 24:1 teaching that sexual immorality is merely an example of what could go wrong in a marriage. The operative part being the first part of the verse, “she does not find grace in his eyes.” Which is considered by some to mean that even though the couple may be faithful to each other, a marriage as a whole can sometimes become intolerable to both parties because of the hardness of their stoney little hearts. Well, thankfully those evil Rabbis, Pharisees and children of the devil and whatever other anti-semetic crap christians love spewing blah blah blah etc etc... in these instances did the decent thing and permitted divorce as long as both husband and wife agreed to it. However according to Torah it is still the husband who must give the divorce papers to the wife. But all is not lost, even though the wife can not hand her husband a bill of divorce she has the right to initiate divorce proceedings if it became intolerable for her. If the rabbis felt the wife's divorce request was warranted, especially under extreme circumstances they would even go so far as to have the husband beaten until he agreed to give his wife the divorce. Now hows that for justice! Blessed be the peacemakers!
Say, I have a old hard back book, found it on amazon awhile back. Unfortunately for me after I paid 25 cabbages for it I found it online. But fortunately for you it can be found online for the low low price of FREE. I double dog dare you to read the book by Isaac Ben Abraham of Troki Faith Strengthened by Isaac Troki . It, I think, will strengthen your faith, one way or the other.
