Fake Punter smiling at Fake Ntini <| sep |> i dont like bias in news so i dont watch those for anything beyond comedy . so i noticed you didnt actually deal with my last comment , you just insulted me ? i take that to mean you know full well the legitimacy of the podesta leaks and are just deflecting because you know what they detail . so i will spare us both the trouble of asking you again and just say good day <| sep |> Yeah , you certainly wont be disappointed ! I switched to the 10 from the LG G 5 and its a big step up from that . I honestly can ' t really fault it much . <| sep |> I ' m excited to see how it works . Stands back at a safe distance and triggers the target <| sep |> Christ ' s rebukes weren ' t exactly about a lack of true faith , but rather about a lack of true love . The Pharisees used their legalism as a judgmental bludgeon against others , judging holiness by how white the sepulcher was on the outside , as it were . But God sees the heart , so Christ knew that prostitutes and tax collectors were entering the kingdom of heaven before you . Why , because they had love and humility and trust in God ' s grace . The Pharisees were tempting Christ here because they wanted to trap Him . They believed a man could put away his wife because under the mosaic law , he could but I think they suspected having just heard Christ ' s comments on forgiving seven times seventy times , in the previous chapter that He might tell them No you ' ve got to always forgive her , no ' cause ' is too big to forgive in which case they could point to the mosaic bill of divorce allowance and say See , you are opposing the law ! But Christ takes a different tack entirely , not condemning divorce per se , but rather reaching back to invoke an even more ancient law and says something amounting to Ok , divorce if you must . but if you do that , no one ever said you could remarry . And the Pharisees are the ones caught rhetorically by this shifting of the question from whether you can divorce to the question of what you can do after you divorce . Forgiving and seeking reconciliation suddenly starts to seem a lot more appealing if there ' s no option to just replace the wife with another . But the point here really seems to be to promote forgiveness and reconciliation over the easy discarding of people as problems . I also think it ' s notable that Christ doesn ' t really mentioned an innocent abandoned spouse in His condemnation . In the assumed context of a cheating wife He condemns the husband who would put her away for this and just replace her , and He condemns her new husband presumably the one she was cheating with originally . She is not condemned explicitly , though it ' s implicit in the second condemnation . But no where at all is described the fate of an innocent spouse who did nothing but who is divorced unilaterally and without cause by a spouse who is intent on running off with someone else , who is more than willing to forgive the other IF they returned but they ' re not going to return . And , by the way , I ' m not saying the moral law isn ' t connected to salvation , as if we ' re saved by faith alone in spite of all sin or something like that , but merely that it ' s the spirit of this law which matters and which really determines sin or not , not the letter .