Except For Fornication ~ Daniel R. Jennings Book link

Except For Fornication: Why Evangelicals Must Reevaluate Their  Interpretation Of Matthew's Divorce Exception Clause: Jennings, Daniel R.:  9781475095395: Amazon.com: Books

http://www.danielrjennings.org/except_for_fornication_version_1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0O23ChD1bLpTu_CQkW4TIrx8TDh1BdDV08Pj71rwJtzLYEPe3hjI4_4fI

This is a free online Book about fornication and what it really means. Many have used this as an excuse to divorce and remarry, please allow the Holy Spirit to teach you!

I am pressed deeply in my spirit to post this along with other teachings on this matter. This truly is a huge deception that has entered the Church in the pulpit, to the choir, to the pews! Sin is sin and must be repented of which means no longer continue in it.

Here is a little excerpt:

Is It Post-Marital Adultery Or Pre-Marital
Fornication That Justifies Divorce And Remarriage?
For nearly five hundred years Protestant scholars have been
debating the meaning of Jesus’ teachings on divorce and remarriage in
Matthew 19:9a. The debate centers on the best way to translate one word
in that verse which determines the meaning of the entire passage. That
word is porneia and, as the following two popular translations will show,
how it is translated makes all the difference in one’s understanding of this
passage.


King James Version
And I say unto you, Whosoever
shall put away his wife, except it
be for fornication (porneia), and
shall marry another, committeth
adultery:

New International Version
I tell you that anyone who divorces
his wife, except for marital
unfaithfulness (porneia), and
marries another woman commits
adultery.


The difference in opinion as to what the underlying Greek word
porneia means has led to two differing interpretations of this passage:
1.) The Fornication View, reflected in the King James Version’s
translation of this passage, which holds that if a man discovers that his
wife has had sexual relations with someone else before they were married
(i.e. committed fornication) then he is justified in divorcing and
remarrying.
2.) The Adultery View, reflected in the New International Version’s
translation, which holds that if a man’s wife has had sexual relations after
they are married (i.e. committed adultery) then he is justified in divorcing
her and remarrying.
The Fornication View holds that the underlying Greek word,
prior to and at the time of Jesus, was used generally to refer to sexual
behavior by single persons (i.e. fornication).
The Adultery View holds that this word was a catch-all phrase for
sexual immorality in general prior to and at the time of Jesus and that in
this context it is referring to adultery.
One’s understanding of what this Greek word means will
influence one’s decision in how to translate it, and ultimately will
influence one’s teaching on who may remarry after divorce and under
what circumstances.
It is important to understand this for a number of reasons. First,
with the large increase in American divorces and remarriages since the
1970’s, pastors need to understand what the New Testament teaches on
this issue. And secondly, because Jesus indicated that even those who sin
in ignorance will still be punished (Lk 12:47-48) it is of the utmost
importance that persons contemplating remarrying after a divorce fully
understand who can and cannot enter into a new marriage.
The purpose of this book is to explore the reasons that led me after
several years of preaching the Adultery View to abandon it in favor of
the Fornication View. As a younger Christian I held very strongly to the
Adultery View but this was not because I had sat down and tried to
formulate a theology of divorce and remarriage. I had simply been raised
to believe this view and when I began taking undergraduate theological
training this was the only view presented by my professors. I did not
really sit down and conclude that the Adultery View was the correct
interpretation (I did not even know that there was another interpretation
for many years), I was just taught this from my youth and never really
looked into it much further. It was only after graduating from Bible
College and studying historical theology that I realized that there was an
alternative view and I would like to present in this book some of the
reasons that led me to change my views and accept the Fornication View.
These reasons included the facts that the way pre-New Testament,
New Testament and post-New Testament writers used the porneia family
of words lent more credence to the Fornication View than it did to the
Adultery View; the King James translation committee and numerous
other translations have favored the Fornication View; the Adultery View
causes Matthew 19:9a to contradict Luke 16:18 which deals with an
adulterous spouse; the Fornication View matches an actual reference to
concealed pre-nuptial sin in the Law of Moses; there is a theological
explanation for the Fornication View based upon the idea of covenant; the
Fornication View is found in natural law; there are logical answers to the
common objections that are raised against the Fornication View; the
Adultery View has been rejected by Christians throughout history; and
the clear teachings of the New Testament upon divorce and remarriage
do not leave any room for an adultery exception.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s