Evidence record

Why do churches disagree about marriage?

Every sentence on the exploration belongs to at least one claim below. Each says what kind of statement it is, what it rests on, what the evidence does not establish, and how far it was checked. Nothing here is a score, and none of it is a verdict on a belief or a theory.

Last checked 23 September 2026.

A judgement, not a fact: 18
Source checked: 38
Presented as open: 1
Partly checked: 2

If something here is wrong, misquoted, out of date or unfair, write to support@unknownoceans.com and give the claim number, which does not change.

What the question takes for granted

A question about why churches reach different positions on divorce, remarriage and same-sex marriage. What the texts say can be checked; what they mean is argued by scholars; what each church teaches is in its own published documents. The page keeps those apart and does not take a side the churches dispute.

The New Testament speaks to these questions
Established
On divorce it does directly, in three forms. On same-sex relationships it has a few passages whose reach is the dispute.
Scripture decides it for churches
Contested
Every church quoted appeals to scripture, but the Catholic and Orthodox churches also appeal to tradition and their own authority, and the Episcopal commission to a process of discernment.
The disputed Greek words can be settled from the lexicon
Open
One word is nearly unattested and the other very common; the lexicon’s own glosses are part of the argument.
Each church speaks with one voice
Contested
The Orthodox council was not attended by every Orthodox church, and Westminster is held by some Reformed churches in some forms. The page names whose documents it quotes.

How the question is labelled

Claim: One flesh, several rules

Kind: Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

"One flesh" is from Mark 10:8, where Jesus answers the question about divorce; the several rules are the three the page sets out: Mark without exception, Matthew with one, Paul with a further case.

Supports · WEB
Mark 10, World English BibleMark 10:8
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: and the two will become one flesh, so that they are no longer two, but one flesh.
Supports · WEB
Mark 10, World English BibleMark 10:9-12
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” ... He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
Supports · WEB
Matthew 19, World English BibleMatthew 19:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.
Supports · WEB
1 Corinthians 7, World English Bible1 Corinthians 7:10-15
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: But to the married I command ... not I, but the Lord ... that the wife not leave her husband ... But to the rest I ... not the Lord ... say, if any brother has an unbelieving wife ... Yet if the unbeliever departs, let there be separation. The brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace.

Claim 76 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Marriage

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

The question

Claim: The New Testament does not contain one rule about divorce.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the three passages quoted in the first section: Mark without exception, Matthew with one, Paul with a further case.

Supports · WEB
Mark 10, World English BibleMark 10:9-12
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” ... He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
Supports · WEB
Matthew 19, World English BibleMatthew 19:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.
Supports · WEB
1 Corinthians 7, World English Bible1 Corinthians 7:10-15
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: But to the married I command ... not I, but the Lord ... that the wife not leave her husband ... But to the rest I ... not the Lord ... say, if any brother has an unbelieving wife ... Yet if the unbeliever departs, let there be separation. The brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace.

Claim: It contains three, and the churches have been working from all of them for two thousand years.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

A compression of the page: the churches’ documents below draw on these passages in different ways.

What this does not establish

Luke 16:18 and Matthew 5:32 carry the saying too; the three are three forms of the rule, not three passages.

Claim 2 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: What the texts say is short and checkable.

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: What they mean is argued, the arguments are old, and the formal positions of the largest churches are published documents anybody can read.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Each church position on the page is quoted from a published document linked in the sources.

Claim 4 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: This question sets those three apart and leaves them apart.

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: On this subject a reader is rarely told what the other side actually holds, and often told what it is really thinking.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

A characterisation of popular debate, not of the churches’ documents.

Corrected

24 September 2026. Previously: “On this subject a reader is least likely to be told what the other side actually holds, and most likely to be told what it is really thinking.” A comparison with every other subject that nothing measures; the page keeps the observation about this one.

Claim 6 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: What follows is the documents.

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Where they are ambiguous this says so, and where churches have decided, it quotes the decision rather than characterising it.

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What the texts say, and what has been decided

Claim: What the texts say, and what has been decided

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

The rule about divorce is not one rule

Claim: The rule about divorce is not one rule

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Heading for the three passages that follow.

Supports · WEB
Mark 10, World English BibleMark 10:9-12
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” ... He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
Supports · WEB
Matthew 19, World English BibleMatthew 19:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.
Supports · WEB
1 Corinthians 7, World English Bible1 Corinthians 7:10-15
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: But to the married I command ... not I, but the Lord ... that the wife not leave her husband ... But to the rest I ... not the Lord ... say, if any brother has an unbelieving wife ... Yet if the unbeliever departs, let there be separation. The brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace.

Claim 10 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Mark has it without qualification: "what therefore God has joined together, let no man separate", and then "whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her", with the same said of a woman.

Kind: Quotes the Bible. The words of a biblical text, in the translation named. That the text says it is a fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · WEB
Mark 10, World English BibleMark 10:9-12
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” ... He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Claim 11 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Matthew has the same saying with four words added: "whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery."

Kind: Quotes the Bible. The words of a biblical text, in the translation named. That the text says it is a fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · WEB
Matthew 19, World English BibleMatthew 19:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.
Context · Greek (SBLGNT)
Matthew 19, SBL Greek New TestamentMatthew 19:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην μοιχᾶται
The exception is three words in Greek, μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ.

What this does not establish

“Four words” counts the WEB’s English; the Greek exception is three words. Matthew’s verse also goes on to the man who marries a divorced woman, and does not repeat Mark’s case of the woman.

Claim 12 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Paul, writing earlier than either,

Kind: Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
The social construction of Paul’s apostolic leadership in Corinthp. 2
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: When Paul wrote our 1 Corinthians (ca. 55 AD)
Supports
Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?the tables of the synoptic hypotheses
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: 60 CE 70 Gospel of Mark 80 CE Gospel of Matthew as Rewritten Mark
Both schemes Malan sets out put Mark at 70 CE or later and Matthew later still.

What this does not establish

The dates are scholarly estimates, not fixed points. The order, Paul before the Gospels, is the widely held view that both articles assume.

Claim 13 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: adds a third case and flags exactly what he is doing: this ruling is his, "not the Lord", and it is that if an unbelieving spouse leaves, "the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases".

Kind: Quotes the Bible. The words of a biblical text, in the translation named. That the text says it is a fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · WEB
1 Corinthians 7, World English Bible1 Corinthians 7:10-15
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: But to the married I command ... not I, but the Lord ... that the wife not leave her husband ... But to the rest I ... not the Lord ... say, if any brother has an unbelieving wife ... Yet if the unbeliever departs, let there be separation. The brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “flags exactly what he is doing: "to the rest I, not the Lord, say", and then rules that” The WEB sets “not the Lord” off with dashes, which the site does not print. The page had replaced them with commas inside quotation marks, so the quotation was not the translation’s. It now quotes only the words it can quote exactly, without importing the dashes the site does not print.

Claim 14 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

So the churches formalised different answers, and published them

Claim: So the churches formalised different answers, and published them

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Each answer below is quoted from its church’s published document.

Claim: The Catholic catechism of 1992 states that "a marriage concluded and consummated between baptized persons can never be dissolved", a bond "henceforth irrevocable".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Catholic

Supports
Catechism of the Catholic Church, the sacrament of matrimony: the effects of the sacrament§ 1640
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Thus the marriage bond has been established by God himself in such a way that a marriage concluded and consummated between baptized persons can never be dissolved. This bond, which results from the free human act of the spouses and their consummation of the marriage, is a reality, henceforth irrevocable

What this does not establish

The rule is for a consummated marriage between two baptized people. Catholic canon law can dissolve some other marriages, which the page does not go into; the canons were not read.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The Catholic catechism states” Dated, as the other churches’ positions on the page are.

Claim 16 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: What that church can do, after a tribunal has examined the case, is declare "that the marriage never existed".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Catholic

Supports
Catechism of the Catholic Church, the sacrament of matrimony: matrimonial consent§ 1629
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: the Church, after an examination of the situation by the competent ecclesiastical tribunal, can declare the nullity of a marriage, i.e., that the marriage never existed.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “which is why that church annuls rather than divorces.” “Annuls” read as undoing a marriage, which is the thing the catechism says cannot be done. What it describes is a declaration that there was never a marriage, and the page now uses its words.

Claim 17 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church, held in 2016, whose decisions delegations of ten churches signed, Moscow’s not among them,

Kind: Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its Impedimentspage heading; signatures
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: The Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church ... Pentecost 2016 ... † Bartholomew of Constantinople, Chairman ... Delegation of the Church of the Czech lands and Slovakia
Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its Impedimentssignatures, searched
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The signatures list delegations of Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem, Serbia, Romania, Cyprus, Greece, Poland, Albania, and the Czech Lands and Slovakia. Searched for Moscow, Antioch, Bulgaria and Georgia: none signs.

What this does not establish

The list shows who signed, not why others were absent, or how far churches that did not attend accept the decisions.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The Orthodox council of 2016” “The Orthodox council” read as all of Orthodoxy. Ten churches signed; the Russian church, the largest, did not attend. The page now says whose decision it is.

24 September 2026. Previously: “The council of Orthodox churches held in Crete in 2016, whose decisions delegations of ten churches signed, Moscow’s not among them,” The document read gives the council’s name and "Pentecost 2016" but not where it met; "Crete" appears only in a signatory’s title. The sentence now names the council as the document does.

Claim 18 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: treats a state marriage as outside the sacrament: "a civil marriage between a man and a woman registered in accordance with the law lacks sacramental character since it is a simple legalized cohabitation recognized by the State."

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Eastern Orthodox

Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsI.9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: A civil marriage between a man and a woman registered in accordance with the law lacks sacramental character since it is a simple legalized cohabitation recognized by the State

Claim 19 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: On remarriage it lists as "absolute impediments to entering into marriage" a marriage "not completely dissolved or annulled" and a third marriage, under a canonical tradition that "categorically condemns bigamy and a fourth marriage".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Eastern Orthodox

Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsII.2
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: A marriage that is not completely dissolved or annulled and a third marriage constitute absolute impediments to entering into marriage, according to Orthodox canonical tradition, which categorically condemns bigamy and a fourth marriage.

What this does not establish

The document lists impediments; it does not say on what grounds, or by whom, a marriage is dissolved, and leaves that to each church. How the Orthodox churches understand a second or third marriage is not described here.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “” The paragraph sat in a list of answers about divorce and gave the Orthodox document’s words on civil marriage and on oikonomia, but not what it says about remarriage. This is the sentence that does.

23 September 2026. Previously: “On divorce it sets a limit rather than a bar: a marriage "not completely dissolved or annulled" stands in the way of another, and the tradition it cites "categorically condemns bigamy and a fourth marriage".” Owner’s rule: only what a credible source verifies is shown. “A limit rather than a bar” was the page’s characterisation of Orthodox practice, which describes a second or third marriage as a concession by oikonomia, and it was marked for someone who knows Orthodox canon law. Narrowed to the document’s own words: what it lists as absolute impediments.

Claim 20 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Where it relaxes a rule, as it may for marriage to a non-Orthodox Christian, it calls that ecclesiastical oikonomia, exercised "with the salvation of man as the goal" and "in a spirit of pastoral discernment".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Eastern Orthodox

Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsII.5.1
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Marriage between Orthodox and non-Orthodox Christians is forbidden according to canonical akribeia
Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsII.5.2
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: With the salvation of man as the goal, the possibility of the exercise of ecclesiastical oikonomia in relation to impediments to marriage must be considered by the Holy Synod of each autocephalous Orthodox Church ... in a spirit of pastoral discernment.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The same document names the mechanism that tradition uses where a rule would otherwise bind absolutely: ecclesiastical oikonomia,” In the document oikonomia is applied to impediments to marriage, and the quoted sentence sits under mixed marriages. Placed in a paragraph about divorce, the old wording implied it was the document’s mechanism for remarriage, which the document does not say.

Claim 21 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Westminster Confession of 1647, which officers of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church still vow to receive, permits both divorce and remarriage, and does it by naming the causes and stopping.

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Reformed

Supports
Confessions and Catechismspreface
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: When the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America was formed in 1788, it adopted (with minor revisions) the Westminster Confession of Faith, Larger and Shorter Catechisms (1647), as its secondary standards ... Officers in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church take a vow to “sincerely receive and adopt” these confessional documents
Supports
The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 2424.5-6
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce: and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead. ... nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage

What this does not establish

One Presbyterian church’s standard, read in its own edition. Other Reformed and Presbyterian churches hold the confession, or revised forms of it, with differing force; they were not surveyed.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The Reformed answer permits both divorce and remarriage, and does it by naming the causes and stopping. Westminster lets” “The Reformed answer” made one confession speak for a family of churches that do not all hold it, or hold it in the same form. The confession is now dated and tied to a church that holds it today.

Claim 22 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It lets the innocent party in a case of adultery sue out a divorce and “after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead”, then closes the list: “nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage.”

Kind: Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 2424.5-6
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce: and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead. ... nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage

Claim 23 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

On same-sex relationships the passages are few, and the English is a decision

Claim: On same-sex relationships the passages are few, and the English is a decision

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

The passages usually cited are Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10; the page quotes the two from Paul.

Context
Malakoi and arsenokoitai: a reflection on 1 Corinthians 6:9 from a Ghanaian (Akan) perspectivep. 206
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: coined by Paul from the LXX of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13

Claim: Romans has "their women changed the natural function into that which is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another."

Kind: Quotes the Bible. The words of a biblical text, in the translation named. That the text says it is a fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · WEB
Romans 1, World English BibleRomans 1:26-27
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: For their women changed the natural function into that which is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another,

What this does not establish

The verse continues “men doing what is inappropriate with men”; the page stops before it.

Claim 25 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: 1 Corinthians has a list of those who will not inherit the kingdom, printed in the translation quoted throughout this site as "nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals", with no footnote.

Kind: Quotes the Bible. The words of a biblical text, in the translation named. That the text says it is a fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · WEB
1 Corinthians 6, World English Bible1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals,
Supports · WEB
1 Corinthians 6, World English Bible1 Corinthians 6, footnotes, searched
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The chapter’s only footnote is at 6:16 (Genesis 2:24). Verse 9 carries none.

Claim 26 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Greek behind those two English words is malakoi and arsenokoitai,

Kind: About a word. What a word in the original language means, or how it is translated.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · Greek (SBLGNT)
1 Corinthians 6, SBL Greek New Testament1 Corinthians 6:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται

Claim 27 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and what they denoted is the centre of the argument rather than a detail of it.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 13
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: This lack of consensus on the meaning of the word among Biblical scholars has some implications.
Supports
Malakoi and arsenokoitai: a reflection on 1 Corinthians 6:9 from a Ghanaian (Akan) perspectiveabstract
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: This paper examines Paul’s use of malakoi (effeminates)

Claim 28 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: A translation that prints a contested word without a note has made a decision and not shown its working, which is the same thing that happens at Junia and at the household codes.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Any rendering of a contested word is a choice; the page asks only that the choice be visible. The comparisons point to other explorations on this site.

And churches have formally decided in both directions, recently

Claim: And churches have formally decided in both directions, recently

Kind: Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsI.10
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: The Church does not allow for her members to contract same-sex unions or any other form of cohabitation apart from marriage.
Supports
Resolution 2015-A036: amend Canon I.18, of the celebration and blessing of marriagefinal text
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Canon 18: Of the Celebration and Blessing of Marriage

Claim 30 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The 2016 Orthodox council: "the Church does not allow for her members to contract same-sex unions or any other form of cohabitation apart from marriage."

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Eastern Orthodox

Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsI.10
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: The Church does not allow for her members to contract same-sex unions or any other form of cohabitation apart from marriage.

What this does not establish

The same section goes on: “The Church exerts all possible pastoral efforts to help her members who enter into such unions understand the true meaning of repentance and love as blessed by the Church.”

Claim 31 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Catholic catechism holds that homosexual acts "are intrinsically disordered" and "under no circumstances can they be approved", in the same passage that says homosexual persons "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity" and that "every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Catholic

Supports
Catechism of the Catholic Church, the vocation to chastity§§ 2357-2358
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." ... Under no circumstances can they be approved. ... They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

What this does not establish

§ 2357 is quoting an earlier declaration for “intrinsically disordered”. The two sentences are consecutive paragraphs, §§ 2357 and 2358, and § 2359 goes on to call homosexual persons to chastity.

Claim 32 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: A declaration of December 2023 allows same-sex couples, though not their unions, to be blessed, "without officially validating their status or changing in any way the Church’s perennial teaching on marriage".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Catholic

Supports
Fiducia supplicans: on the pastoral meaning of blessingsPresentation and § 31
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: the possibility of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples without officially validating their status or changing in any way the Church’s perennial teaching on marriage.
Supports
Fiducia supplicans: on the pastoral meaning of blessings§ 31
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities
Supports
Fiducia supplicans: on the pastoral meaning of blessings§ 5
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: the Church does not have the power to impart blessings on unions of persons of the same sex.

What this does not establish

The declaration allows such blessings only in a form that is not ritual and cannot be confused with a wedding; it does not change the catechism quoted before it.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “” The page gave the Catholic position from the catechism of 1992 alone, under a heading about recent decisions. The Catholic Church’s most recent official document on the question is this declaration, and it describes itself as leaving the teaching unchanged.

Claim 33 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: In 2015 the General Convention of the Episcopal Church amended the canon titled "Of the Solemnization of Holy Matrimony" to read "Of the Celebration and Blessing of Marriage", striking the definition of matrimony as "a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman" and the declaration that the parties hold marriage to be "a lifelong union of husband and wife", and rewriting the rest in terms of "the parties" and "the couple".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Anglican

Supports
Resolution 2015-A036: amend Canon I.18, of the celebration and blessing of marriagefinal text, title
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: CANON 18: Of the Solemnization of Holy Matrimony Canon 18: Of the Celebration and Blessing of Marriage
Supports
Resolution 2015-A036: amend Canon I.18, of the celebration and blessing of marriagefinal text, struck Sec. 2(b) and Sec. 3(d)-(e)
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: That both parties understand that Holy Matrimony is a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman ... do solemnly declare that we hold marriage to be a lifelong union of husband and wife
Supports
Resolution 2015-A036: amend Canon I.18, of the celebration and blessing of marriagefinal text, new Secs. 2 and 4
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: The couple shall notify the Member of the Clergy of their intent to marry ... Prior to the solemnization, the parties shall sign the following Declaration of Intention

What this does not establish

The archive’s text marks struck and inserted words by formatting, which a plain-text copy loses; which words were struck was read from the page as displayed. The new declaration still calls marriage “lifelong”.

Claim 34 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It took effect on the First Sunday of Advent that year.

Kind: Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Resolution 2015-A036: amend Canon I.18, of the celebration and blessing of marriagefinal text
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: That this canon shall become effective on the First Sunday of Advent, 2015.

Claim 35 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Where the argument actually is

Claim: Where the argument actually is

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: These are not private opinions.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

The documents quoted in the section above are promulgated or enacted by the churches concerned.

Claim 37 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: They are enacted texts, and each of them is linked below.

Kind: Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Resolution 2015-A036: amend Canon I.18, of the celebration and blessing of marriagelegislative history
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Concurred as Amended
Supports
Fiducia supplicans: on the pastoral meaning of blessingsclosing
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: for the Doctrine of the Faith, on 18 December 2023, approved this Declaration
Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its Impedimentssignatures
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: † Bartholomew of Constantinople, Chairman

What this does not establish

“Enacted” fits the canon and the council’s decision most exactly; the catechism is promulgated teaching and the declaration an approved document of a dicastery.

Claim 38 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What the exception in Matthew covers

Claim: What the exception in Matthew covers

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The word is porneia,

Kind: About a word. What a word in the original language means, or how it is translated.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · Greek (SBLGNT)
Matthew 19, SBL Greek New TestamentMatthew 19:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ

Claim 40 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and what it covers in a sentence like this one is an open question.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Presented as open. The page says this is unresolved, and the review found that it is.

An argued reading implies rivals; the page does not list them because the one study read does not name them in its abstract.

Context
The Meaning of Porneia in Matthew 5.32 and 19.9: an Approach from the Study of Ancient Near Eastern Cultureabstract
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Abstract only, 23 September 2026
The source reads: The author argues that the Matthean use of the term porneia in the divorce excep tion clauses of 5.32 and 19.9 is best understood by reference to the notion of divorce withjust cause

Claim 41 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The study cited here argues for one reading of it: intercourse during betrothal or marriage with someone other than the husband.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

Supports
The Meaning of Porneia in Matthew 5.32 and 19.9: an Approach from the Study of Ancient Near Eastern Cultureabstract
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Abstract only, 23 September 2026
The source reads: limits just cause to porneia, sexual intercourse during betrothal or marriage with someone other than the wife's husband

What this does not establish

Read from the abstract; the article is closed.

Claim 42 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Whole systems of church law rest on which reading is taken.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Westminster allows divorce for adultery, the exception read one way; the Catholic catechism holds a consummated sacramental marriage indissoluble.

Context
The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 2424.5
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce

Claim 43 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: This is the clearest case on the page of an argument that turns on the meaning of a single word, which makes it the useful one to understand first.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “an argument that is genuinely about a word and not about anybody’s preferences,” “Not about anybody’s preferences” implied that the other arguments on the page are about preferences. That describes the people on both sides of them in terms they reject.

Claim 44 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What the Corinthian words denote

Claim: What the Corinthian words denote

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: One of the two words is rare enough to be argued about on its own.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 13
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: it is found just at two places in the New Testament (1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10)

Claim 46 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It appears twice in the New Testament and nowhere earlier,

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 13
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: it is found just at two places in the New Testament (1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10)
Supports
Malakoi and arsenokoitai: a reflection on 1 Corinthians 6:9 from a Ghanaian (Akan) perspectivep. 206
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: have asserted that, the term avrsenokoi/tai is not mentioned in any literature prior to 1 Corinthians 6:9

What this does not establish

“Nowhere earlier” is what the scholars Nyarko cites assert; the audit did not search the Greek corpus itself.

Claim 47 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and it is read either as a compound Paul made from the words for male and for bed, or as a Jewish coinage already taken from the Greek of Leviticus.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 17
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: The first view holds that the word is a coinage of Paul, while the second postulates that it is a Jewish coinage from the Septuagint translation of Leviticus 18:20 and 20:13.
Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 17
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Colin Smith asserts that Paul appears to have created it by joining the two words arseno (male) and Koiten (bed or sexual lying).

What this does not establish

Komolafe cites Leviticus 18:20 where Nyarko has 18:22; 18:22 is the verse about lying with a male.

Claim 48 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The other is the ordinary word for soft, used elsewhere in the New Testament for fine clothing and here for something else.

Kind: About a word. What a word in the original language means, or how it is translated.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 22
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: New Testament uses it as soft, soft to touch, delicate (M att. 11:8; Lk. 7:25)
Supports
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for malakos, with its word frequencyentry, sense III.2.d
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: d. = παθητικός , PHib. 1.54.11 (iii B.C.), 1 Ep.Cor. 6.9

Claim 49 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: What divides the readings is what follows from that.

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: One takes the word as coined from the Greek of Leviticus 20:13 and as condemning every man who takes the active part in sex with another man.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 23
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: On one hand, some scholars argue that Paul condemns all men in general, who are active partners in male-male sexual act.
Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 23
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: He argues that arsenokoitai is a compound word coined from the Septuagint version of Leviticus 20:13.

What this does not establish

Komolafe reports the reading in a sentence, names Fortenberry for the derivation from Leviticus, and takes this side himself. The page no longer says what else those who hold it rest it on.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “One takes the derivation from Leviticus to fix the sense as male same-sex conduct in general, and reads Romans as calling it contrary to nature, so the traditional position is what the texts plainly say.” Owner’s rule: only what a credible source verifies is shown. The reading was stated in the page’s own terms, with a step through Romans and a conclusion about what the texts plainly say that the source read does not carry, and was marked for a theologian. Narrowed to the two things Komolafe reports that side as arguing.

Claim 51 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The other takes the exploitative setting to be part of what is being condemned, so that a committed relationship between equals is not what the texts describe.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 23
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: While Robin Scroggs posits that the word denotes “exploitative pederasty”, 28 Boswell believes that the word refers to homosexual rape or homosexual prostitution.

What this does not establish

Komolafe reports these views at second hand, and takes the other side himself.

Claim 52 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: John Boswell argued that case at length in 1980; David Wright’s rebuttal that asks in its title whether the word means prostitutes at all came in 1984, and the argument has not closed since.

Kind: What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review: Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

Supports
Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexualitypublisher’s description
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Abstract only, 23 September 2026
The source reads: when it was first published in 1980
Supports
Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of arsenokoitai (1 Cor. 6:9, 1 Tim. 1:10)Crossref record
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Catalogue record only, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of arsenokoitai (1 Cor. 6:9, 1 Tim. 1:10) ... Vigiliae Christianae ... 1984
A catalogue record: it supports the title, the journal and the year, 1984, and nothing Wright argues.
Supports
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary Churchp. 23
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: Scholars like Robin Scroggs and Boswell do not agree with the views of Bill Fortenberry and David Wright.

What this does not establish

Boswell’s book and Wright’s article were not read: the dates and Wright’s title are from the publisher’s page and the Crossref record, and what each argues is from Komolafe’s summary. Crossref dates the edition the site links to 1981.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “That case was argued at length in 1980; the rebuttal” The sentence gave dates for two works it did not name. Named, a reader can find them.

Claim 53 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The shortage of evidence about the words is real rather than convenient.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the rarity of one word and the breadth of the other, set out under “What the first hearers understood”.

Claim 54 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Whether the divorce case is a precedent or a warning

Claim: Whether the divorce case is a precedent or a warning

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Mark gives no exception.

Kind: Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports · WEB
Mark 10, World English BibleMark 10:2-12, WEB, read in full and searched for “except”: none
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Churches that now marry divorced people are doing something a plain reading of Mark forbids, on the strength of an exception in one Gospel and a case Paul says is his own judgment.” Owner’s rule: only what a credible source verifies is shown. “Something a plain reading of Mark forbids” described every remarrying church in terms at least some of them reject, and was marked for a theologian. Narrowed to what Mark says and to the one remarrying church’s document the page quotes; the second sentence is claim 78.

Claim 56 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The grounds the Westminster Confession allows, quoted above, answer to the exception in Matthew and the case Paul marks as his own.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

The page’s reading of the correspondence: Westminster’s adultery beside Matthew’s exception, and its desertion beside Paul’s case of the unbeliever who departs.

Supports
The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 2424.5-6
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce: and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead. ... nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage
Supports · WEB
Matthew 19, World English BibleMatthew 19:9
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.
Supports · WEB
1 Corinthians 7, World English Bible1 Corinthians 7:12-15
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: But to the rest I–not the Lord–say, if any brother has an unbelieving wife ... Yet if the unbeliever departs, let there be separation. The brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace.

What this does not establish

The confession as printed in the edition read gives no proof texts, so the correspondence is the page’s, not the confession’s own statement. Westminster’s “willful desertion” is wider than Paul’s case of an unbelieving spouse, and what Matthew’s porneia covers is argued under “What the exception in Matthew covers”.

Claim 78 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: One side takes that as proof the tradition has always read this material with judgment rather than literally, and can again.

Kind: Disputed. A contested point, where the page reports a side or the disagreement.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

The Episcopal commission’s report lists divorce and remarriage among such precedents.

Context
Liturgical Resources 1: I Will Bless You, and You Will Be a Blessing (revised and expanded)Liturgical Resources 1, theological introduction
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: the Church has faced many other similar times of wrestling over differing views of Scripture concerning a wide range of questions

What this does not establish

One of two readings the page sets side by side. It endorses neither.

Claim 57 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The other takes it as the example of a concession that went further than it was meant to.

Kind: Disputed. A contested point, where the page reports a side or the disagreement.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Mark 10:5 has Jesus call the Mosaic permission a concession “for your hardness of heart”; the page states the view without attributing it to a named document.

Supports · WEB
Mark 10, World English BibleMark 10:9-12
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” ... He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

What this does not establish

One of two readings the page sets side by side. It endorses neither, and does not attribute this one to a named document.

Claim 58 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The same history supports both, which is why it keeps coming up in arguments about this.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the two readings before it. The Episcopal commission’s 2015 report is one argument that sets the question beside divorce and remarriage (claim 73).

Corrected

24 September 2026. Previously: “The same history supports both, which is why it appears in almost every argument about this.” No source counts the arguments; the Episcopal commission's report is one that uses it, and the page no longer claims almost all.

Claim 59 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What the evidence will not support

Claim: What the evidence will not support

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What the first hearers understood

Claim: What the first hearers understood

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The two words are hard in opposite ways, and it is worth not running them together.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the lexicon entries described next.

Claim 62 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Arsenokoitai is rare: the lexicon gives it under another spelling, glosses it "sodomite", and cites only an epigram in the Greek Anthology and this verse, and scholars report no earlier use.

Kind: About a word. What a word in the original language means, or how it is translated.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for arsenokoitesentries ἀρσενοκοίτης and ἀρρενοκοίτης
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: ἀρσενο-κοίτης , A. v. ἀρρενοκοίτης . ... ἀρρενο-κοίτης , ου , ὁ , A. sodomite, AP9.686 ; ( ἀρσ- ) 1 Ep.Cor. 6.9 .
Supports
Malakoi and arsenokoitai: a reflection on 1 Corinthians 6:9 from a Ghanaian (Akan) perspectivep. 206
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: have asserted that, the term avrsenokoi/tai is not mentioned in any literature prior to 1 Corinthians 6:9

What this does not establish

“Sodomite” is the lexicon’s 1940 gloss, not a neutral definition; it is the kind of rendering the page says is contested. The date of the Greek Anthology epigram was not checked.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “the lexicon’s entry for it is a cross-reference and nothing more, and it is unattested before Paul.” The entry under this spelling is a cross-reference, but the entry it points to gives a gloss and two citations. “Nothing more” left out what the lexicon says. “Unattested” was an absence the audit could not search, now attributed to the scholars who assert it.

Claim 63 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Malakoi is the opposite of rare.

Kind: About a word. What a word in the original language means, or how it is translated.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for malakos, with its word frequencyPerseus word frequency for μαλακός
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: New Testament | max 7 | min 1

Claim 64 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It is an ordinary adjective meaning soft, and Perseus’s own corpus alone returns it in nearly two hundred works, Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Xenophon, Aristophanes and Sophocles among them, with the New Testament as one entry.

Kind: About a word. What a word in the original language means, or how it is translated.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for malakos, with its word frequencyentry and Perseus word frequency (194 works listed)
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: μα^λα^κός , ή , όν , A. soft ... Homer, Iliad | max 16 | min 10 ... Herodotus, The Histories | max 7 | min 3 ... Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War | max 7 | min 5 ... Sophocles, Antigone | max 1 | min 1 ... New Testament | max 7 | min 1

What this does not establish

The frequency table lists 194 rows, some of them duplicate editions, with between 509 and 933 occurrences depending on how ambiguous forms are counted.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “returns it more than fifty times, in Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Xenophon, Aristophanes and Sophocles, with the line from 1 Corinthians sitting among them as one entry.” The table lists 194 works and at least 509 occurrences; “more than fifty times” understated it tenfold. The New Testament is one row with up to seven occurrences, not one line.

Claim 65 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: So one word has to be reconstructed from almost nothing, and the other has to be narrowed from a very wide ordinary sense to whatever Paul meant by it in a list,

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the two entries described above.

Claim 66 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: though the lexicon already files this verse under a narrower sense it equates with pathetikos, passive.

Kind: About a word. What a word in the original language means, or how it is translated.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Supports
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for malakos, with its word frequencyentry, sense III.2.d
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: d. = παθητικός , PHib. 1.54.11 (iii B.C.), 1 Ep.Cor. 6.9
Supports
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for pathetikosentry, sense II
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: receptive, passive , opp. ποιητικός

What this does not establish

The lexicon’s classification is its editors’ judgement and is part of what is argued; the papyrus it cites alongside is from the third century BC.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “” The page cited the lexicon for the breadth of the word and left out that the same entry places 1 Corinthians 6:9 under a specific sense. Both halves are now there.

Claim 67 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Neither difficulty is the other.

Kind: This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review: A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Claim 68 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: That is a statement about the evidence, not a way of avoiding the question, and it is why this is filed as unknown rather than as settled by anyone.

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “it is why this is filed as uncertain rather than as settled by anyone.” The passage is in the page’s “unknown” section, not its “uncertain” one; the sentence named the wrong state.

How each side sees itself

Claim: How each side sees itself

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What each position takes itself to be doing

Claim: What each position takes itself to be doing

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The churches that have not changed understand themselves as holding a given form of marriage that is not theirs to alter, and say so in those terms as well as in prohibitions: for the Orthodox council marriage is "the oldest institution of divine law", and the Catholic catechism says the Church "does not have the power to contravene" the bond it describes.

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Eastern Orthodox, Catholic

Supports
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsI.2
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026
The source reads: marriage is considered to be the oldest institution of divine law because it was instituted simultaneously with the creation of Adam and Eve
Supports
Catechism of the Catholic Church, the sacrament of matrimony: the effects of the sacrament§ 1640
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: the Church does not have the power to contravene this disposition of divine wisdom.

What this does not establish

Read from these two churches’ documents; other churches that have not changed were not surveyed. The catechism’s sentence is about the indissolubility of marriage.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “and generally say so in those terms rather than in terms of prohibition.” Both documents the page quotes speak in prohibitions (“does not allow”, “under no circumstances can they be approved”), so “rather than in terms of prohibition” was contradicted on the same page. The sentence now shows the self-understanding in each church’s own words.

Claim 72 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Episcopal Church, which has changed, understands itself as reading the same scripture by the same apostolic process the church has always followed, and reaching a different result: the report its Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music put to the 2015 convention sets the question beside older arguments over "divorce and remarriage" and "the institution of slavery".

Kind: A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review: Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by: Anglican

Supports
Liturgical Resources 1: I Will Bless You, and You Will Be a Blessing (revised and expanded)Liturgical Resources 1, theological introduction
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: As a Church, we continue to take different approaches to interpreting Scripture as we consider same-sex relationships.
Supports
Liturgical Resources 1: I Will Bless You, and You Will Be a Blessing (revised and expanded)Liturgical Resources 1, theological introduction
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: the Church has faced many other similar times of wrestling over differing views of Scripture concerning a wide range of questions ... polygamous households, divorce and remarriage, contraception, the institution of slavery
Supports
Liturgical Resources 1: I Will Bless You, and You Will Be a Blessing (revised and expanded)Liturgical Resources 1, theological introduction
Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026
The source reads: In all these times, the Church has sought to follow the apostolic process of prayerful deliberation, which respects the centrality of Scripture

What this does not establish

A commission’s report to the convention, not an enacted text. Other churches that have changed were not surveyed.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The churches that have changed understand themselves as reading the same scripture with the same tools the tradition has always used, including the ones it used on divorce and on slavery, and reaching a different result.” The sentence spoke for every church that has changed and cited nothing. It now gives one such church’s account of itself, in its own words.

Claim 73 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: A reader who wants to understand the argument rather than win it has to be able to state both of those without sneering. That is harder than it sounds.

Kind: Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What was read

Mark 10, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.org: Mark 10The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
Matthew 19, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.org: Matthew 19The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
1 Corinthians 7, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.org: 1 Corinthians 7The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
Romans 1, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.org: Romans 1The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
1 Corinthians 6, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.org: 1 Corinthians 6, with its footnote blockThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
Catechism of the Catholic Church, the sacrament of matrimony: the effects of the sacramentThe Holy See · English text, vatican.va IntraText, §§ 1638 to 1642The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright Libreria Editrice Vaticana; quoted briefly
Catechism of the Catholic Church, the vocation to chastityThe Holy See · English text, vatican.va IntraText, §§ 2337 to 2359The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright Libreria Editrice Vaticana; quoted briefly
The Sacrament of Marriage and its ImpedimentsThe Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church, Crete · English text, holycouncil.org, with signaturesRead in full, 23 September 2026 · Copyright Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church; quoted briefly
The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 24Orthodox Presbyterian Church · Orthodox Presbyterian Church edition, opc.org, chapter 24The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain (text of 1647)
Resolution 2015-A036: amend Canon I.18, of the celebration and blessing of marriageGeneral Convention of the Episcopal Church, Archives of the Episcopal Church · Archives of the Episcopal Church, Acts of Convention, final textRead in full, 23 September 2026 · Copyright The Archives of the Episcopal Church; quoted briefly
The Meaning of Porneia in Matthew 5.32 and 19.9: an Approach from the Study of Ancient Near Eastern CultureDavid Janzen, Journal for the Study of the New Testament · Abstract via Crossref; JSNT 23(80) (2001) 66 to 80Abstract only, 23 September 2026 · Copyright; quoted brieflyThe article is closed (SAGE).
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for arsenokoitesLiddell, Scott and Jones, Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University · LSJ (1940) on Perseus: the entries ἀρσενοκοίτης and ἀρρενοκοίτηςThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for malakos, with its word frequencyLiddell, Scott and Jones, Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University · LSJ (1940) on Perseus: the entry μαλακός, and Perseus’s word-frequency table for itThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
Christianity, Social Tolerance, and HomosexualityJohn Boswell, University of Chicago Press · University of Chicago Press book page (description); Crossref record for the DOI editionAbstract only, 23 September 2026 · Copyright; quoted brieflyThe book was not read. The press page says it was first published in 1980; Crossref dates the edition linked 1981.
Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of arsenokoitai (1 Cor. 6:9, 1 Tim. 1:10)David F. Wright, Vigiliae Christianae · Crossref record; Vigiliae Christianae 38(2) (1984) 125Catalogue record only, 23 September 2026 · Copyright; title onlyJSTOR is closed; only the record was read.
Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Its Discourse in Relation to the Contemporary ChurchSunday Bobai Komolafe, Oguaa Journal of Religion and Human Values 7.2 · Publisher PDF, Oguaa Journal of Religion and Human Values 7(2) (2024) 11 to 26Read in full, 23 September 2026 · Open access; quoted brieflyThe article’s citations are irregular in places; it is used here for the views it reports, not as an authority on them.
Malakoi and arsenokoitai: a reflection on 1 Corinthians 6:9 from a Ghanaian (Akan) perspectiveErnest Nyarko, E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies 7.12, pages 201 to 214 · Publisher PDF, E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies 7(12) (2021) 201 to 214Read in full, 23 September 2026 · CC BY 4.0Read as a PDF from noyam.org; the earlier ledger row found only a challenge page.
The social construction of Paul’s apostolic leadership in CorinthJack Barentsen, HTS Teologiese Studies 74(4), open access · Publisher PDF, HTS 74(4), art. 5191Read in full, 23 September 2026 · CC BY 4.0
Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?Gert J. Malan, HTS Teologiese Studies 70(1), open access · Publisher PDF, HTS 70(1), art. 2101Read in full, 23 September 2026 · CC BY 4.0The dates quoted are from tables setting out Mack’s and Müller’s hypotheses.
Matthew 19, SBL Greek New TestamentSociety of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software, via eBible.org · SBL Greek New Testament (2010), eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright 2010 Society of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software; quoted briefly
1 Corinthians 6, SBL Greek New TestamentSociety of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software, via eBible.org · SBL Greek New Testament (2010), eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright 2010 Society of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software; quoted briefly
Catechism of the Catholic Church, the sacrament of matrimony: matrimonial consentThe Holy See · English text, vatican.va IntraText, §§ 1625 to 1637The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright Libreria Editrice Vaticana; quoted briefly
Confessions and CatechismsOrthodox Presbyterian Church · OPC web page, Confessions and CatechismsRead in full, 23 September 2026 · Copyright Orthodox Presbyterian Church; quoted briefly
Fiducia supplicans: on the pastoral meaning of blessingsDicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, The Holy See · English text, vatican.va, dated 18 December 2023Read in full, 23 September 2026 · Copyright Libreria Editrice Vaticana; quoted briefly
Liturgical Resources 1: I Will Bless You, and You Will Be a Blessing (revised and expanded)Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, Reports to the 78th General Convention of the Episcopal Church, supplemental materials · Blue Book supplemental materials, 2015 (PDF, 270 pages): the theological introduction to Liturgical Resources 1The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright 2015 The General Convention; quoted briefly
A Greek-English Lexicon, entry for pathetikosLiddell, Scott and Jones, Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University · LSJ (1940) on Perseus: the entry παθητικόςThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain