YOUR OPINION: What about Joseph and Mary's near divorce?
396948
They were engaged, which back then was considered being practically married.  Had he accused her of being pregnant and not by him, the logical conclusion the elders would have taken is that she had fornicated and would have been stoned to death per Jewish law based on the Law given to Moses.\n\nIt is not clear where he would have sent her, since it would have to have been away from any jewish settlement where there wouldn't be a chance of her being tried and put to death.
371306
there wouldn't be a divorce...\n\nGollum would just join in...\n\nGOD MY EYES!!!!!
162576
come on, weren't her and joseph married?\nyou cannot be legally married without consumating the marriage?  \ni don't think she was a virgin either\nnice question
898841
They should be.  Plus a zillion more.  We are so caught up in the romance of marriage, we forget that it is s-e-r-i-o-u-s.  We don't want to talk about these things.\nAnd we can always get a divorce, right?  Even when both parties agree it isn't working out it still causes immeasurably emotional damage.\n\nHere are a few from my arsenal:\nWhat will you do when you find you cannot agree?\n\nWho will be responsibile for paying the bills and keeping the checkbook?\n\nWhat is your attitude toward children?\nWhat would you do if you cannot conceive children of your own?\n\nHow often do you want to invite people to your home?\n\nWhere will you spend Christmas, Thanksgiving and Easter? How will you decide?
165607
IT'A LONG, BUT INTERESTING:\n\n“They Must Become One Flesh”\n\nWhen the first human couple were wed, God stated that a man “must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24) Hence, marriage was to be a permanent bond. That is why Jesus later stated that “the ground of fornication” is the only basis for Scriptural divorce with the possibility of entering a new marriage.—Matthew 19:3-9  DEATH WOULD ALSO END THE MARRIAGE\n\nA Christian cannot enter marriage thinking: ‘If it doesn’t work out, I can always divorce.’ Marriage is to be viewed as a permanent bond.\n\nJesus made clear that marriage was to be permanent when he answered a question put to him about the propriety of divorce. He stated: “Did you not read that [God] who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’? So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together let no man put apart.”—Matthew 19:4-6.\n\nDIVORCE AND SEPARATION\n\n  God, the Originator of marriage, designed it to be a permanent union. But is there any Scriptural reason for a person to divorce his or her mate—and one that would allow for the possibility of remarrying? Jesus addressed this matter by declaring: “I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:9) Sexual infidelity by a mate is the only ground for a divorce that will allow the innocent mate to remarry.\n\n  In addition, the Bible’s words at 1 Corinthians 7:10-16, while encouraging marriage mates to stay together, allow for separation. Some, after trying very hard to preserve their marriage, feel they have no choice but to separate. What can be acceptable Scriptural grounds for such a step?\n\n  One is willful nonsupport. When getting married, a husband assumes the responsibility of providing for his wife and children. The man who willfully fails to provide the material necessities of life “has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith.” (1 Timothy 5:8) So separation is possible.\n\n  Another is extreme physical abuse. So then, if a mate physically abuses his wife, the victim may separate. (Galatians 5:19-21; Titus 1:7) “Anyone loving violence [God’s] soul certainly hates.”—Psalm 11:5.\n\n  Another ground for separation is the absolute endangerment of a believer’s spirituality—one’s relationship with God. When a mate’s opposition, perhaps including physical restraint, has made it impossible to pursue true worship and has imperiled the believer’s spirituality, then some believers have found it necessary to separate.—Matthew 22:37; Acts 5:27-32.\n\n  However, if divorce is pursued under such circumstances, one would not be free to enter a new marriage. According to the Bible, the only legitimate ground for divorce that permits remarriage is adultery or “fornication.”—Matthew 5:32.\n\nNEXT IS A ??? THAT WAS ASKED BY  SOMEONE:\nNo Divorce?\n\nI disagree with your view that the Bible allows the innocent mate to remarry. (January 8, 1986, page 12, footnote) Whoever separates from the other should remain single or else be reconciled. (1 Corinthians 7:10, 11) One should be prepared to forgive the mate.\n\nO. A. F., Nigeria\n\nForgiveness is proper when the guilty party truly repents. However, at Matthew 19:9 Jesus stated: “I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery.” This indicates that if the innocent party gains a divorce on the grounds of fornication, he is free to marry another without that being considered adultery. At 1 Corinthians 7, Paul is referring to a separation rather than a Scriptural divorce.\n\nTo what extent need a faithful Christian wife resist a divorce action brought by her mate?\n
744287
ereyes:  Catholics don't believe that Jesus and Mary Magdelene were married.  Wherever you get your information, you need to replace it with credible sources.\n\nIt wouldn't change my belief.  If Jesus was both fully human and fully devine, then I would expect the fully human portion of him to have been in love.  \n\nHe still would have died on the cross and rose on the 3rd day.  THAT's what Christianity is about.  Not whether or not Jesus was married.  \n\nIt actually would answer a lot of questions.  Men back then got married at an early age...what was Jesus doing at 30 unmarried?  The community must have been thinking there was something strange about that.
663511
Quite the conundrum.\n\nThere are such things as survivable marriages.  Divorce really should be a last, last, last resort, especially once kids are involved.\n\nThat said, there can be a point where more harm comes to the kids with a bitter marriage.  Mom and Dad never get along.  One or both drink too much, are never home, abusive, etc.  \n\nKids are fairly resilient.  They recover well so long as both parents remember that through divorce the kids needs are most important.  \n\nI'm in a good (not great) marriage.  I could easily get "lazy" and neglect my marriage based on this.  (Cheating, withdrawing etc) but the kids need a stable family and my life really isn't all that bad.  (After all, I CHOSE my wife and CHOSE to have kids).  \n\nDivorce is NEVER good when kids are involved.  It is a question of which is the worse of two evils:  A less than good marriage with the family working to hold together or a impulsive divorce that destroys kids faith in adults, parents and family.
1042139
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! I don't follow. How are you two brother and sister if you got married? No where in the law nor the bible nor any moral code I have ever heard of does it state that after a divorce is your ex considered you sibling. Is this some kind of redneck thing? If so you have much bigger problems then the sin of divorce.
851291
one should think they would be over joyed\n\nmarriage is a religious thing, and if you really want separation of church and state, but out of marriages
419217
I have always heard that Jesus had half siblings. Why would he not, when Mary and Joseph were husband and wife? Sorry, all you Catholics out there. \n\nAll in all, it's very exciting evidence.
179033
According the the story, God caused Mary to conceive, thus being his father.  Mary did not have sex with Joseph.  He was like a surrogate father to Jesus. OK?
399741
I agree as well sex out of wedlock back then was looked down apon. Its was probley dirty and nasty mind you it was gods warm gooey seed being sloshed into Marys gash.
931301
We know from Jewish records of familiy history that Mary was born at home, but after being weaned from her mother, she was sent to live in the temple, as were many other girls and boys during this time and culture.\n\nShe was raised and educated in the temple until she was close to puberty.  Boys could live in the temple past puberty, but girls could not, as they would be defiling the temple at the onset of puberty as per levitical law.\n\nWhen she was brought back home, her parents set out to marry her off and Joseph was the one chosen to be her husband.  From this point on, there was a one year waiting period in which she would continue to live at home and wait for Joseph to come and claim his bride.\n\nThere is actually more of Mary's childhood written in the Quran (copied from Jewish records) than in the bible. I find that quite interesting especially from those who claim that the bible was put together by Catholics for Catholics, as they would have put everything they could have about Mary if they had put the bible together.\n\nThere are also some false writing that have endured over the years about both Mary and Joseph.  You would have to compare them to secular records of times of births and deaths to try and judge truthfullness and accuracy.\n\nI have not researched Joseph's background and truthfully there is not much available for research.  There is a lot of speculation, but not much authentic truth to go on.
600412
There would be nothing wrong with Jesus having a wife and even children. He would not have violated His perfectness because marriage then was a very sacred thing. Most marriages at that time were arranged and it is quite possible that to hold with the customs of the time Jesus may have had an arranged marriage.\n\nWhether or not He was married to Mary Magdeline is a topic that will be discussed for many years. There is some evidence in the Gospel of Mary that she may have been because Jesus told her things that He did not tell the other disciples. It also says (indicates) Jesus kissed her on the mouth, not done except to a wife at that time.\n\nThose who were chosen to assemble the Bible as we have it today had hundreds of letters and gospels to choose from. Because they wanted to make the Bible masculine they choose mainly those books that carried out this wish of the early mainly Catholic church. They required all the other writtings to be destroyed. Thank goodness they are slowly finding some of the copies that did not get destroyed such as the "Dead Sea Scrolls" and now the most recent Gospel of Judas.\n\nAlthough the De Vinci Code is basically a fictional story, I beleive the reason, especially the Catholic Church is so opposed, the occurances depicted is because it is closer to the truth than they want the people to know. The church has always tried to control the people by fear; something that I have always disliked. By making many things that were not sin into sin they could make the people pay to have forgiveness of these "sins". The church was able to fill their coffers easily in this way and some churches still do this today.\n\nTo me Jesus is a very real person and He is my Savior, but I do not hold with any church because of they way they have lied to their people over the years. You don't have to go to a church to be a Christian...All it requies is a belief and a love for Jesus. there is no other requirement.
611740
First of all angels are not magical, they are created by God, just as we are.  Secondly, Jewish custom had a method of courtship called betrothal, which actually meant the couple were married, they had a ceremony and everything, but they did not live together and actually dated with much supervision, like the whole of both families, and they worked to build up what would be their own abode, remember they are legally married, but no sex yet - it is during this time that the Holy spirit passed over Mary and she conceived.  Joseph was going to divorce her, as he like any man would, thought she had had sex with another man, but an angel came to him in a dream and told him otherwise, so he did as the angel directed him.  He did not have intercourse with Mary until after Jesus was born.  So, no he was not born before his earthly parents were married and no, they did not have sex before they were married.  And if a true Christian doesn't believe in angels, then question their Christianity.  You had excellent questions and observations, thank you - it's refreshing to get some for a change.
335858
I think I saw the article you speak of and NO there is no truth to the story without skewing the numbers.\nLike taking the divorce rate as a percentage of total population and not of total marriages.\nWhich supports the answer given by Kala that there are more folks living together out of wedlock in liberal states than in conservative states.\n\nI found some stats on one of the CENSUS related sites
606021
It's for Nick. No question! It would be a lot more interesting story line than if it was for Jack. This could kill Sharon but maybe not. What's going to happen is once Sharon and Nick finds out about this, they going to go on with the divorce because Sharon is in love with Brad anyway and Nick and Phyllis are crazy for each other. Sorry, Jack, you got other issues to deal with. You have to save Jabot from the turmoil your step-mom, Gloria caused.