You wrote:
>> In Matthew 19:9 Jesus is describing the teaching of the
Pharisees, which
> authorized a man to divorce his wife even if she were not guilty of
> "porneia" (the ground set out by Moses in Deut 24:1) and then to marry
> another woman. <<
>
> There is still a basic unanswered point that is causing me difficulty
> to accept the argumentation. Would you please review some of the
> earlier posts on this subject and provide an answer to the
> presupposition that Deut 24:1 is to be equated with PORNEIA? I have
> read the theologically reasoned explanations. However, I still view
> the above basic premise as a presupposition that, when kicked, the
> whole palace comes crashing to the ground (Note: this is my personal
> illustration to best portray how the argument appears from my perch
> and is not intended to belittle the argument).
>
> Those earlier posts probed the presupposition that since certain
> Hebrew idioms such as "see nakedness" to sexual misconduct, then that
> must also be the case at Deut 24:1 ("find the nakedness of a thing"),
> and therefore, this must also be the PORNEIA to which Jesus referred.
> All this even though the LXX translators used the word ASCHMON ("ugly
> thing" "uncomely thing" etc.) and not PORNEIA (i.e. "sexual
> intercourse outside of marriage"), words with different meanings.
> (Please see the earlier posts for the details)
>
> These earlier posts have not yet been answered and yet need to be if
> one is to accept the premise, I think.
>
> Thank you in advance.
> Sincerely,
> Wes Williams
>
>