In the Catholic Bible Matthew 5:32 says "But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawfull) causes her to commit adultery,..." NAB. In the Protestant NIV bible it replaces"(unless the marriage is unlawfull)" with "except for marital unfaithfullness". Why the difference?

NIV is, IMO, very dangerous indeed. Perhaps this is a bit offtopic, but I must, I just must, first:

KJV
Mat 5:32
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.

Young's Literal Translation

Mt 5:32
but I-I say to you, that whoever may put away his wife, save for the matter of whoredom, doth make her to commit adultery; and whoever may marry her who hath been put away doth commit adultery.

We find only one reason given to put away, that is to say, divorce the wife. It is the reason God divorced the house of Israel in Jer 3:6

. The LORD said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen [that] which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up upon every high mountain and under every green tree, and there hath played the harlot.

These green 'groves' in the KJ, are the 'Asherah' in the AV. click this for more

Jer 3:7
And I said after she had done all these [things], Turn thou unto me. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw [it].

Jer 3:8
And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.



The NIV perverts an almost uncountable number of verses, while also omitting many critical verses. More on this later. The NIV has altered verses to reflect gender inclusive, as well as gender nuetral, casting away all of the original context in so doing, ex. alterations: "brothers and sisters" is put instead of "brothers" (but the reader is not informed of the change in a footnote, as in the NRSV); the generic masculine use of "man," "he," "his," etc., is eliminated, usually by recasting the sentences with plural forms. Singular nouns (e.g. "someone") are followed by plural pronouns ("they" instead of "he"), so that the pronouns actually disagree in number with their antecedents.

Mat 18:15-21
NIV1984
If your brother sins against you,a go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' b If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
... Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, 'Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me?

NRSV 1990
If another member of the church a sins against you, b go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. c But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
... Then Peter came and said to him, 'Lord, if another member of the church d sins against me, how often should I forgive?

TNIV 2002
If a brother or sister sins,a go and point out the fault, just between the two of you alone. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' b If they refuse to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
... Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, 'Lord, how many times shall I forgive someone who sins against me?

TheTNIV revisers could not even refrain from neutering the Greek word aner, which can only refer to an adult male, a husband. In the first edition of the New Testament (2002) they gave "the number of believers" as a rendering of the phrase arithmos ton andron in Acts 4:4, lit. "the number of adult males." In the Old Testament the same strategies are used for eliminating masculine pronouns, avoiding the word "man," and so forth. We note also that in Isaiah 19:16 where the prophet says "the Egyptians will become like women and tremble with fear," the TNIV has "In that day the Egyptians will become weaklings," apparently to avoid offending readers who might object to Isaiah's use of a "stereotype" about women (similarly Jeremiah 50:37, 51:30, and Nahum 3:13), completely forsaking the deeper teachings of what God means by the term 'women' in the OT when speaking of Israel and spiritual adultery.

There are certain groups whom find large appeal in this, and the fact of altering the very holy word of God does not seem to be any concern for its followers, at least not the ones I have spoken to personally. Out of hundreds, only 1 has gone back to the good ol KJ to hold up the head, who is Christ.

Literary critic on the NIV translation was homosexual author Dr. Virginia Mollenkott. In Episcopal, Witness (June 1991, pp. 20-23), she admits, "My lesbianism has ALWAYS been a part of me. . ." To no surprise, "sodomite" is completely removed from the NIV. (Deut. 23:17, I Kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46, II Kings 23:7) And of course, I Cor. 6:9, ". . . effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. . ." is replaced with the non-offensive ". . . nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders. . ." Notice the NIV in I Cor. 6:9 does NOT condemn "homosexuals" or the "act of homosexuality" - but ONLY "homosexual OFFENDRS".

In 1988 Zondervan and the NIV was purchased by Harper & Row, Publishers (now HarperCollins Publishers). HarperCollins publishes "pro-homosexual" books such as Making Out, The Book of Lesbian Sex and Sexuality described as "Beautifully illustrated with full-color photography,. . . Making Out is the complete illustrated guide to lesbian sexuality and relationships. . .the intricacies of love play. . ." and many other pro-homosexual books. HarperCollins is a subsidiary of the global media empire, The News Corporation, owned by Rupert Murdock.

Jesus Christ plainly said in Matthew 7:17-18:

Even so every GOOD tree bringeth forth GOOD fruit; but a CORRUPT tree bringeth forth EVIL FRUIT. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a CORRUPT tree bring forth GOOD FRUIT. (Matthew 7:17-18)

Do you think Jesus Christ was LIEING? Can we really believe God sheds His blessings when His HOLY word is given to be "owned" by that group? ". . .for what fellowship hath RIGHTEOUSNESS with UNRIGHTEOUSNESS? and what communion hath light with darkness?"2 Cor. 6:14

Amazing, the King James Bible is the ONLY Bible that is not OWNED by men. In Matt. 8:2, 9:18, 15:25, 18:26, 20:20, Mark 5:6, 15:19 "worshipped him" is removed in the NIV! Why doesn't the NIV want Jesus Christ to be worshipped? Hint: see Luke 4:7, Matt. 4:9. The King James Bible has no COPYRIGHT ownership! It's copyright is the CROWN COPYRIGHT which ALLOWS it to be published by ANYONE, ANYTIME! Without asking ANYBODY for permission!

". . .but the word of God is NOT BOUND." 2 Timothy 2:9

SAIAH 14:12: The KJB reads, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!. . ." The NIV PERversion reads, "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, son of the dawn. . ." The NIV change "Lucifer" to "MORNING STAR".

BUT WAIT. . . I thought the Lord Jesus Christ was the MORNING STAR?

Doesn't Revelation 22:16 say, "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and MORNING STAR".

The NIV CLEARY AND BLATANTLY makes LUCIFER -- The Lord Jesus Christ! WHAT BLASPHEMY! WHAT PERVERSION! And Christians claim the NIV is a "better translation"!

The NIV perverts The Lord's Prayer into The Devil's Prayer!

LUKE 11:2-4: The KJB reads, ". . .Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." The NIV removes everything that refers to a Holy God in heaven -"WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. . . Thy will be done, AS IN HEAVEN, so in earth. . . but DELIVER US FROM EVIL." Everything that distinguishes God from the Devil is REMOVED! "OUR FATHER" of the NIV is "NOT IN HEAVEN" and "DOES NOT DELIVER FROM EVIL!" I wonder who it could be? (hint: see John 8:44)

The NIV completely "TAKETH AWAY" these Wonderful and precious verses:

MATTHEW 18:11: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.".
ACTS 8:37: "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

The NIV PERversion completely "TAKETH AWAY" Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, Luke 17:36, 23:17, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, 15:34, 24:7, 28:28, Romans 16:24 and 1 John 5:7!

After Mark 16:8 the NIV says, "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20." ZAP-There goes another 12 verses! And by the way, that is absolutely untrue! The book, The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel of Mark, by Dean Burgon contains over 400 pages of documented evidence for Mark 16:9-20, that has never been refuted, nor ever will!

After John 7:52, the NIV, reads, "The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11" ZAP-There goes another 12 verses!

Matt. 12:47, 21:44, Luke 22:43 and 22:44 are all removed in the footnotes!

That's 45 complete verses the NIV removes from the text or in the footnotes!

The NIV "TAKETH AWAY" 64,576 words!

Don't look for the "mercyseat" in the NIV - GONE!
Don't look for "Jehovah" in the NIV - GONE!
Don't look for the "Godhead" in the NIV - GONE!

The NIV removes wonderful Bible "terms" like remission, regeneration, impute, propitiation, new testament and many others!

Here's a small (very small) sampling of words removed in the NIV!

Matt. 6:13, "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."
Matt. 15:8, "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth"
Matt. 19:9, "and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery."
Matt. 20:7, "and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive."
Matt. 20:16, "for many be called, but few chosen."
Matt. 20:22, "and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with"
Matt. 25:13, "wherein the Son of Man cometh."
Matt. 27:35, "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet They parted my garments among them and upon my vesture did they cast lots"
Mark 6:11, "Verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."
Mark 10:21, "take up the cross."
Luke 1:28, "blessed art thou among women"
Luke 4:4, "but by every word of God"
Luke 4:8, "get thee behind me Satan"
Luke 4:18, "he hath sent me to heal the broken hearted"
Luke 11:2-4, "Our ... which art in ... Thy will be done, as in heaven so in earth... but deliver us from evil"
John 1:27, "is preferred before me"
John 3:13, "which is in heaven"
John 3:15, "should not perish"
John 11:41, "from the place where the dead was laid"
John 16:16, "because I go to the Father"
Acts 10:6, "he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do"
Acts 15:18, "Known unto God are all his works"
Acts 20:24, "But none of these things move me"
Acts 23:9, "let us not fight against God"
Rom. 8:1, "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit"
Rom. 13:9, "Thou shalt not bear false witness"
I Cor. 6:20, "and in your spirit which are God's"
I Cor. 11:24; "Take eat... broken"
II Cor. 10:4, "but mighty through God"
Gal. 3:1, "that you should not obey the truth"
Eph. 5:30, "of his flesh, and of his bones"
Phil. 3:16, "let us mind the same thing"
I Tim. 6:5, "from such wthdraw thyself"
Heb. 7:21, "after the order of Melchisedec"
I Pet. 1:22, "through the Spirit"
I Pet. 4:14, "on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified"
I John 4:3, "Christ is come in the flesh"
I John 5:13, "and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God"
Rev. 1:11, "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last"
Rev. 5:14, "him that liveth for ever and ever"
Rev. 14:5, "before the throne of God"
Rev. 21:24, "of them which are saved"

FACT:
The KJB is a literal word for word translation. When the translators had to add words for sentence structure they are in italics. The NIV uses "dynamic equivalence". Rather than a word for word translation, they add, change and subtract to make the verse say what they "thought" it should! The Preface to the NIV even says, ". . .they have striven for more than a word-for-word translation. . ."

Matt 5;32 Amplified Bible

whoever dismisses and repudiates and divorces his wife, except on the grounds of unfaithfulness (sexual immorality) , causes her to committ adultery; and whoever marries a woman who has been divorced commits adultery.

dennis manning

Hi Sean.

the truth is that marriage is a 'covenant', a mutual agreement to be held to, between two...a man, and a woman. Only 2 are to be involved in it. and the marriage covenant is between the two alone. Just as from the beginning....and the two become 'one flesh'. as one.

Marriage is a sacred covenant. (in the case of a man and his wife, this is demonstrated by fidelity and faithfulness in intimate sexual matters..the two becoming one flesh--it is most sacred, and not to be shared outside the marriage arrangement...indeed this reflects a great mystery--the love between a man and a woman- )
If either party breaks the covenant by unfaithfulness in the marriage covenant, the covenant is broken.....

then the innocent party is free to divorce, by God's standards, and to re-marry. (or the innocent one may forgive, if that is what they wish to do--they are free to decide.)

if someone divorces their mate, execpt upon the grounds of adultery, for any other grounds, it subjects all parties to adultery.

one man. one woman. the bridegroom and the bride.
the union is a holy union, and to be held as deeply sacred.
the marriage bed should be without defilement.

this is great mystery...as it also relates to God and his covenants...
they are to be held and cherished in faithfulness. God is faithful.
spiritual adultery is a breaking of the covenant to worship "no other God(s)", but Jehovah God, the creator of heaven and earth.

various and many translations are available today, and comparison is always in order. i have many....as many as 26. compare ...but the truth can be found in any of the various ones available. and digging for truth, you will find the truth.

But God is faithful. and we must faithfully worship only Him.
He that authored the word, also guards and cherishes that same word. He is able.
But, unless you read Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, you will not be able to read it as it was originally written down. But there are many and varied search tools available to search to see what the original meanings were, if you wish to see them.

But who authored the many languages we now have? God himself.
He is the author and creator of even every language.
and the truth is contained in His word....in every language.

keep seeking for truth as for hid treasure.

keep asking. and keep seeking.

May God grant you to find what you are looking for.
But worship only the Creator of heaven and earth.

if we worship any other gods, we are guilty of 'spiritual adultery'.
as it is written. the book of Hosea, chapter 2 discusses the spiritual adultery of the nation of Israel....she went after other gods.
But God is faithful. Israel did not keep the covenant.

Jesus institued a new covenant, taking the old law covenant out of the way. So let us be faithful to what Jesus taught, and told us to do.
and in this way, prove ourselves as chaste virgins.
for the marriage is not yet....but it quickly approaches.
but the betrothal has already taken place...invitations are out.
the marriage of the Lamb is near. let the ones waiting keep their lamps lit, and oil with their lamps. the friends of the bridegroom will rejoice, as well as the friends of the bride. Psalm 45 speaks of this, as well as the Song of Solomon.


love,
bz

The words husband, wife and divorce related also to the premarital situation in the first century.
Hence Joseph, a single man was called Mary's husband and Mary was called his wife by virtue that they were engaged (espoused).
Joseph is then seen about to "divorce" Mary while as they are not married yet. Matt. 1:18-24

The words husband, wife and divorce had dual definitions.
A man could divorce his engaged "wife" which meant the engagement was off.
So there was a premarital divorce that existed at the time Christ spoke in Matt. 5:32; 19:9.

Christ is in effect saying in 5:32 that if you're going to divorce your wife you better do it before you marry her because after you are married you are designated as that which God has joined together which no man may put asunder. Only death frees the surviving member of the marriage to be able to marry again.

This correct understanding of the exception makes it unnecessary to alter one word in Mark 10:2-12 and Luke 16:18. Those verses are absolutely true as written.
The proponents of divorce for adultery are forced to change Mark and Luke.
The exception pertains EXCLUSIVELY to the then commonly understood PREMARITAL divorce on account of the "wife's" fornication, not adultery. The correct Greek says for fornication. It does not say for adultery neither does it use the phrase "marital unfaithfulness".

Adultery is defined as the offence committed AFTER marriage. The word fornication can be used to mean exclusively the premarital act.
[The NIV is filthy and every educated Christian will not have one in their house lest they be accursed.]

For a more thorough understanding of this visit my website under the divorce section:
www.newreformation.wimms.com

The old saying: till death do us part happens to be true.
Remarriage after divorce from the lawful spouse is always adultery no matter what the reason is for the divorce.
Hence, Mark 10:2-12 and Luke 16:18 are the absolute truth as written. Those using the exception to contradict the plain message found in Mark and Luke are being used of the adversary to deceive the hearts of the simple, they themselves being deceived and simple.
The sharpness I use is not to belittle or destroy but to edify.
To the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet.

Very well said.
It should be noted too, <this is not what "Pulic Worship" teaches> that only Israel has any covenant, and the church which is gentile, called the church which is His body has no covenant relation, and even is called to grow unto a perfect man, wherein we find the Greek words, "teleios anEr". Well, those are the words 'mature husband' not only in the Greek, but as the words are used elsewhere in the Bible, and we don't even have to go beyond Ephesians if we don't want to, for in ch5 this word anEr is translated husband 5 times when comparing the closest relationship <that of husband and wife> in the Bible ever made known, until this new and even closer relationship is being made known <that of head and body>.

Husbands, love your wifes even as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it.

Husbands, love your wifes as your own bodies, like this

Christ gave His life for His own body, the church

Eph 5:26
That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

Eph 5:27
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

Eph 5:28
So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

For begins the argument:

Eph 5:29
For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:

Eph 5:30
For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

Eph 5:31
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

Eph 5:32
This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

"They two shall be one flesh is patterned after the first marriage where they were LITERALLY one flesh by virtue of the fact that she was made from his body.
At no time during the life of Adam and Eve could she claim to not be one flesh with him.
Only if he died could she make that claim the same as if your arm was cut off, then you could say, "my arm is no longer part of my body".
Paul had this understanding as we see quoted above in Eph. 5. The woman is the man's own body and the man the woman's.
Neither adultery nor dessertion nor any imaginable offence warrants the offender being no longer one flesh with their mate.
Of course a situation such as for self preservation may arise where the responsible thing is to separate from one another, but divorce, which is a declaration that they are no longer one flesh and is therefore turning the truth of God into a lie is not an option.
There is a difference between separation and divorce.
If she departs let her remain unmarried or be reconciled.
Remarriage is not an option, remarriage is adultery.
That is why Jesus declared remarriage after divorce to be adultery; because they are one flesh and it is not possible that a piece of paper declaring a divorce can change that God ordained reality. If someone marries a divorced person whose former lawful mate still lives, that someone is committing adultery because divorce DOES NOT dissolve the marriage. If it did, then it wouldn't be adultery to marry the divorced.