The Mountain Retreat

Biblical Discussions => Apologetics => Topic started by: Dan on October 02, 2003, 05:14:42 AM

Title: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Dan on October 02, 2003, 05:14:42 AM
It seems to me that those who say divorce is unbiblical are hypocrites.

Take fundamentalist preacher Oral Roberts. He is a good example of this. He set high biblical standards for his university (ORU). He has even said that if you are overweight, you cannot attend. I'm a little overweight, and because of that I would have been rejected for admission (not that I would have ever applied).

Likewise, at ORU a divorced person found themselves just as rejected. But Oral Robert's son married a woman who had big problems with the ministry. In the end, the son divorced her and with Oral Robert's blessings. That is what I am talking about with the hypocricy of fundamentals.

And if you wondered how Oral would deal with the heir to all his possessions now that this irreversible action had been done, he simply did what all fundamentalists do. The son wrote a book claiming that he had lost his salvation. The book was called "Second Chance" It went on to say that He was resaved and then remarried another woman more compatible to the honesty standards of Oral. Talk about your self serving fundamentalists, is this not hypocricy?

It seems to me the son dropped his pants, and everyone at ORU is pretending they did not see it. Where are all those charismatic fundamentalist standards on this issue. They went right out the window.

The point is, divorce is an evil thing until you want one. Then it becomes a necessary thing. Don't be a hypocrite and tell others they can't do what you would do.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Kenneth White on October 02, 2003, 07:13:12 AM
It seems to me that those who say divorce is unbiblical are hypocrites.

Take fundamentalist preacher Oral Roberts. He is a good example of this.

Dan,
  You certainly cannot judge biblical christians by the acts of one man. Oral Roberts is not representative of either reformed, or biblical christians.

And even if he was, just because you could find an example of one man who acted hypocritically, that doesn't make the doctrine wrong or all christians who believe it hypocrites.

 Deu. 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

All of us are responsible for our own sins, not the sins of anyone else. This man is not a shame unto those who believe that divorce is ungodly, but a shame unto himself.


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Rich Aikers on October 13, 2003, 04:05:07 AM
I am struggling with the issue of divorce and am looking for your views on the issue. My pastor tells me that in the case of my wife committing adultery, it is proper for me to divorce her because of the exception for fornication.

"And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." Matthew 18:9

I don't want to stay with her because I don't really trust her anymore, but this leaves me wanting to accept that advice, but with my conscience bothering me. What is the christian thing to do. Is it lawful for me to divorce her because of this?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: GoldRush on October 13, 2003, 12:29:37 PM
Rich,

Welcome to this discussion group and we hope you will receive sound answers to your question regarding divorce.

Without knowing particulars, we will only repeat the words of Jesus Christ:

". . A man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.  So then, they are no longer two, but one flesh.  Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."   Matthew 19:5&6

May God give you much wisdom,  comfort, and peace in your situation.  We will pray for repentance and forgiveness in your house.

J&R








Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Sandy on October 13, 2003, 04:20:02 PM
Rich,

My husband was an elder in the church we attended and this topic had to be addressed.  Here is the result of much study, and Scripture comparison.  I hope this will help you in this difficult matter.  I also hope you will find the courage, faith, and love to do what honors our Lord.

     What does God have to say regarding divorce and remarriage?

Gen 2:24  Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

     God describes a man and woman coming together in marriage as having become a single flesh.  They are no longer two.  If the two become one, how can the two be divided for any cause?

Mat 19:6  Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

     We clearly see that when God instituted marriage, He meant it to be for life.

Rom 7:2  For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
1Co 7:39  The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

     If God never intended for divorce why do so many preachers and churches teach that it is biblically permissible for believers to divorce for fornication?

Mat 5:31  It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
Mat 5:32  But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Mat 19:9  And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

     Looking at these verses in isolation from the rest of the Bible it would certainly appear that God is allowing divorce on the grounds of adultery.  But we cannot understand exactly what God is teaching unless we look at these verses in their proper context.

     In both of the above verses Christ is dealing with a problem of hardness of heart.  The Pharisees are the teachers of the law.  As teachers they fully know what the law says regarding divorce.  When we look at the exact wording of the law we get a better picture of how the people were using the wording of the law to suit their own ungodly purposes and their hardheartedness.

De. 24:1  When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

     The Phariseeís are testing Christ and trying to show Him to be a false teacher.  So they ask Him a question which they already have the answer for.  They know the answer because it is clearly written in the law.

Mat 19:3  The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?

     The Phariseeís know that the uncleanness spoken of in the law was to be only for sexual uncleanness, or adultery.  But they very coyly ask Christ if the Law of Moses permitted divorce for EVERY CAUSE.

     Christ answered them:

Mat 19:4  And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Mat 19:5  And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh
Mat 19:6  Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Mat 19:7  They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away
Mat 19:8  He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
Mat 19:9  And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

     In verse 9 Christ is not saying that it is permissible to divorce for adultery, but that adultery was to have been the only cause for divorce in the Law of Moses.  The Israelites were using the wording (uncleanness) of the law to put away (divorce) their wives for whatever uncleanness suited them.  There found many causes for uncleanness.  Any type of bodily discharge would suffice.    If it had not been for the hardness of their own hearts God would not have allowed for a bill of divorcement to have been written.  God clearly tells us what He thinks of divorce:

Mal 2:16  For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.

     God hates divorce.  Divorce for any cause is not biblically supported.  If it were we would have contradiction in the Word of God.  And the Word cannot contradict.

Mar 10:2  And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him,  Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
Mar 10:3  And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
Mar 10:4  And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
Mar 10:5  And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
Mar 10:6  But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Mar 10:7  For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
Mar 10:8  And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
Mar 10:9  What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Mar 10:10  And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
Mar 10:11  And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
Mar 10:12  And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

     These verses in Mark show a little more clearly what God had allowed in the law and clearly what God had intended when He brought together man and woman to become one flesh.  These verses show no exception at all for divorce.  In fact they clearly teach that if a believer divorces and remarries he/she commits adultery.  We see this again in Luke:

Lu 16:18  Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

     Again, there is no exception for adultery.  God clearly states that there is to be no divorce for any cause between believers.  Of course this law applies to all mankind, but unbelievers will not accept any of Godís laws including this one.

     According to the view of some teachers/preachers, churches, there is biblically one more cause whereby Christians are freed from the law.

1Co 7:12  But to the rest speak I, not the Lord:  If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
1Co 7:13  And the woman which hath a husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Co 7:14  For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Co 7:15  But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

     Many use verse 15 to teach that if the unbelieving spouse chooses to divorce the believer, this then frees the believer from the bondage of the law, thereby allowing the believer to remarry.  But when we view this verse in light of the many other verses of Scripture that clearly speak of being bound in marriage until death, we see this cannot be referring to the bondage of the law.  We are called to be at peace with all men.  When believers are unequally yoked with unbelievers their marriage could be anything but peaceful.  So what bondage is God telling us we are free from?  God says in vs. 15 that He has called us to peace.  Since there may or may not be peace in an unequally yoked marriage, God is saying that if the unbeliever desires to leave the marriage, then the believer is freed from the legal contract of an unholy union, but this is not giving the believer permission to remarry.  In fact according to the law of God, which is still intact, we are called adulterers and adulteresses if we remarry while our spouse still lives.   The law of being bound in marriage until God separates us in death is still there.  We are free from the bickering that may come from this marriage, but we must never marry again, unless or until our former spouse dies.

     With unbiblical, liberal teaching in many Christian churches today, divorce is as common as grass.  Both husbands and wives are given permission and sometimes-even blessings in their desire to divorce.  Is it any wonder that the divorce rate within Christian circles today is above 51%?  What a sad commentary on how we twist the Word of God to suit our selfish purposes.

Rom 7:2  For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
Rom 7:3  So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

1Co 7:39  The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

     The disciples themselves saw much difficulty with the teaching of Christ regarding divorce and remarriage.  Christ had indeed given a difficult pill to swallow.    

Mat 19:10  His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

     Will we continue to hold to our manmade doctrines on this topic, or will we yield to the teachings of Christ?
 
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Rich Aikers on October 14, 2003, 06:45:01 PM
Rich,

Welcome to this discussion group and we hope you will receive sound answers to your question regarding divorce.

Without knowing particulars, we will only repeat the words of Jesus Christ:

". . A man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.  So then, they are no longer two, but one flesh.  Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."   Matthew 19:5&6

May God give you much wisdom,  comfort, and peace in your situation.  We will pray for repentance and forgiveness in your house.
J&R

Thanks for the response. You say without knowing particulars, you can't say. Does that mean that there are particulars which would allow me to divorce? How about adultery. Is that grouds for divorce, because this is what my pastor says.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Rich Aikers on October 14, 2003, 06:47:05 PM
Rich,

My husband was an elder in the church we attended and this topic had to be addressed.  Here is the result of much study, and Scripture comparison.  I hope this will help you in this difficult matter.  I also hope you will find the courage, faith, and love to do what honors our Lord.


Sandy, thanks for the response. But is fornication the same as adultery. This is my wife who has committed adultery. Is that grounds for divorce according to the bible?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: GoldRush on October 14, 2003, 07:50:01 PM
Rich,

You say without knowing particulars, you can't say.


We meant the particulars of your personal situation.  For example, we do not know if your wife is still living with you, or if she has departed from you.  We do not know whether she is a believer in Jesus Christ or not.

Does that mean that there are particulars which would allow me to divorce?  

No, the Scripture says clearly:

"A husband is not to divorce his wife."  I Cor. 7:11

How about adultery. Is that grouds for divorce, because this is what my
pastor says.


We are always loathe to speak against another's pastor, but in this instance we must to be faithful to God' word.  Your pastor is wrong.  And you mentioned you felt uneasy about what he told you, which means you also sense he is wrong.  

Adultery is not an excuse to divorce.  If your wife remains in your house, you must seek to find forgiveness in your heart for her sin and be a help to her to not repeat the sin.  If your wife has left you, you are to remain married and hope for reconciliation.

If she has left you and she instigates a divorce but does not remarry, you may have peace in the separation, but still hope to reconcile.  If she has left you, divorces you, and remarrys, then she has compounded her sin of adultery, and you may not reconcile with her again because of her defilement (Deut. 24:4) . . .but even then she remains your wife,
and you still are not free to remarry, lest you also commit adultery.

This is very important to consider.  If your wife divorces you for another, you are not guilty of adultery yourself, but you may not remarry. If you should divorce your wife, you become guilty of adulterating the marriage, along with your wife, and you may not remarry.

  Either way,  you must be prepared for a life of celibacy (Matt. 19:10-12), unless you stay with her.   This is the thing that many pastors fail to tell people (or simply do not want to believe.)

This is hard truth, but adultery is extremely serious.  Repentance and forgiveness are the only heals for an adulterated marriage.  For unrepentant or continued adultery will surely be condemned by God:

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Do not be deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."  I Cor. 6:9&10

You must seek with all your heart to turn her away from this practice and teach her God's forgiveness through your own act of forgiving her.  You must help her to escape this condemnation and not do anything that might contribute to the adultery yourself.  Your eternal soul and her eternal soul are at stake, it is that serious.

Our hearts go out to you, and we pray for much strength for you to act carefully and obediently according to the Holy Scriptures.

J&R




Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Doug Johnson on October 15, 2003, 09:06:39 AM
Goldrush,
  I don't understand your advice. Why should he be strapped with a life of celibacy just because his wife made a mistake, or he made a mistake? Don't you believe in forgiveness? If he asks God isn't his and her sins forgiven? Isn't her sins forgiven so that they both can start fresh, get the iligitimate marriage annuled and mary another so they can be happy? God is a God of love and forgiveness.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Layla on October 15, 2003, 11:50:28 AM
Greetings Doug

Thanks for joining this thread.  I have to tell you I was becoming "bothered" by some of these responses and was wondering if I was hearing the sounds of a "works" doctrine.


Romans 8:
3. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
4. that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Peace,
Layla
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: GoldRush on October 15, 2003, 07:31:45 PM
Our reply to the criticisms from Doug and Layla:

Doug:

Why should he be strapped with a life of celibacy just because his wife made a mistake, or he made a mistake?
 

When God joins two persons in marriage, it is for their lifetime, and man cannot put the union asunder.  No matter what the sins committed, the two people remain one flesh.  Marriage cannot be undone.

If the husband joins with another simply because the wife has sinned, the husband joins the wife in sin and also adulterates the existent marriage.

Don't you believe in forgiveness?  

Didn't you carefully read our post?  Go back and read it again, and you will see the exhortation to forgive is placed upon the one offended.  The spouse must forgive the one who committed adultery.

What you are suggesting, is that the spouse who has been offended should be able to join with another, and God will forgive him for doing so.  Is that how a Christian handles temptation and sin?  Is that how a Christian faces life?  I will go and indulge my lusts and needs, and sin, but God will forgive me anyway?

That is testing God.  That is a fallacy.  That is not faith.

If he asks God isn't his and her sins forgiven? Isn't her sins forgiven so that they both can start fresh, get the iligitimate marriage annuled and mary another so they can be happy? God is a God of love and forgiveness.  

Start fresh with additional marriages?  You equate forgiveness from God a justification to obliterate what God has joined together?  You deceive yourself, man.  God does not command one thing, and then ignore His own works and purposes, just because men and women sin.

God is not in the business of keeping mankind happy.  Marriage was instituted to reveal to mankind the faithful relationship of Jesus Christ with His church and the grace Christ shows His bride; forgiving her all sins with unconditional love.  A man is to love his wife just like Jesus Christ loves his church.

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her."  Ephesians 5:25

The offended spouse must be willing to forgive and place the well-being of his mate and the marriage in first place.  Self-serving lusts, must be sacrificed, in order to faithfully preserve the union.


Layla:

 I have to tell you I was becoming "bothered" by some of these responses and was wondering if I was hearing the sounds of a "works" doctrine.



No, this is not a "works" doctrine.  This is a "faithfulness" and "obedience" doctrine.  

If you do not know the difference, it is good you are here to learn.  

J&R
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Layla on October 15, 2003, 10:20:15 PM
Quote
No, this is not a "works" doctrine.  This is a "faithfulness" and "obedience" doctrine.  

If you do not know the difference, it is good you are here to learn.    

Greetings Goldrush,

I understand faithfulness and obedience.  I also understand that Christ fulfilled the law.  Does this give us liberty to sin...God forbid!  I am not here to teach and I am not here to learn.  I am here for fellowship with many who are well learned in the word.  The Holy Spirit teaches me.  Just because you or anyone else writes something, it doesn't make it truth.  The fact is, the gentlemen spoke of his wife committing adultery.  You only need to read his words to know that he is struggling with this.  What shall he do, go on with a marriage where there is no trust?  Perhaps his pain is more than he can bear.  Scripture was given:

Mat 19:9  And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

His wife commited adultery.  He is free to divorce her, why do you attempt to bind him with the letter of the law where none exists because of his faithfulness to Jesus Christ.  This is how I see things.  I did not mean to imply you personally were teaching a works doctrine.  And I meant to offend none. I was stating that in viewing the responses, they were beginning to ring of "works" ever so subtly.  I am not posting across this forum attempting to teach my understandings, but I thought the forum was free enough to allow the sharing of personal opinions or understandings.

Peace,
Layla
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: GoldRush on October 15, 2003, 10:59:00 PM
Layla,

I am not here to teach and I am not here to learn.  
 

So why are you here?

You only need to read his words to know that he is struggling with this.  What shall he do, go on with a marriage where there is no trust?

Yep.  Did Christ base His forgiveness of our sins based upon any trust in our humanness?  No.  Christ forgave us according to His inherent attributes of grace, love, and righteousness.

Just because you or anyone else writes something, it doesn't make it truth.


Indeed.  That is why we post giving Scriptural reference.  Maybe you did not bother to read the Scriptural references.  (We find this is a common omission of those who participate on discussion boards.)

What shall he do, go on with a marriage where there is no trust?  
 

You betcha . . .if Rich trusts in God.

Trust is only rebuilt through forgiveness and help.

His wife commited
adultery.  He is free to divorce her


This is not biblical truth.   You do not understand the full context  of the response of Jesus in Matt. 19:9 and do not even bother to search for what preceded this in Matthew 19:8&9.  You are falling prey to proof-texting, just to suit your opinions.

why do you attempt to bind him with the letter of the law

Every husband or wife is bound by the principles of marriage for life.  That is an immutable fact, that has never been changed by God.



 I thought the forum was free enough to allow the sharing of personal opinions or understandings.
 

This forum is only open to the sharing of Scripture presenting God's truths.  Scripture is required to interpret and teach every other Scripture presented, and no private interpretations are welcomed or entertained.



J&R
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: andreas on October 15, 2003, 11:28:30 PM
<<<But is fornication the same as adultery.>>>
Fornication is not the same as adultery.We have two different words.The word "porneia" is used in Matt  5:32, 19:9, and Matt. 15:19 ,where it is used alongside "moiheia".In John 8:41 the word "porneia" is used instead of "moicheia" "Porneia" means fornication and "moicheia" adultery.Two words two meanings.
andreas. 8)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: andreas on October 15, 2003, 11:51:19 PM
<<<I am not here to teach and I am not here to learn. >>>
For those of us who are here to learn, the word of God gives us the answer regarding divorce and remarriage.
Even if divorce is inevitable,the person who divorces should not remarry.1 Corr.7:10-11.
Remarriage is only legitimate after the death of a spouse.1 Corr.7:39,and Rom.7:1-3.
The flesh relationship is not obliterated by divorce or remarriage.Deut.24:1-4.
All remarriage after divorce is adultery.Luke 16:18.
All remarriage after divorce is adultery.Mark 10:11-12.
andreas. 8)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Sue Landow on October 16, 2003, 04:20:07 AM
Thanks for the response. You say without knowing particulars, you can't say. Does that mean that there are particulars which would allow me to divorce? How about adultery. Is that grouds for divorce, because this is what my pastor says.


Rich, You cannot listen to what your pastor says, nor what people may say in this forum. As christians we are obligated to listen to the Word of God. Even though we are saved by grace, we still have to be obedient to the laws against sin. Do not ever think that grace excuses sin.

 Ro 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
 15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

You do forgive your wife, and that means that you forgive as God forgives, and put her sin far away from her. There is no cause for divorce. Work it out between you, her, and the Lord. Build trust, and love her as God loves you. Do not think of divorce because God says "what He has joined together, let no man put asunder".

Most of all pray for her. Prayer changes things. Pray for your marriage, and have faith that God works all things for good to them that love him.


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Layla on October 16, 2003, 10:34:33 PM
Greetings Rich

I hope you realize that I am not suggesting that you divorce your wife.  I was negligent to join this thread without offering you some words of hope or edification to gain strength.  I agree with Sue that forgiveness and prayer is the most important thing for you to concentrate on at this time.  Ask the Lord to lead you.  My prayers go out to you that the Lord strengthen and guide you.

To those who would place me "outside the camp" because I disagreed with the "tone" of the responses, I do not wish to debate with you and nitpick at our responses to one another.  Obviously, we see things differently, and I'll just leave it at that.  

Peace,
Layla

Gal 3:3   Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Pilgrim on October 17, 2003, 09:12:39 AM
I am struggling with the issue of divorce and am looking for your views on the issue. My pastor tells me that in the case of my wife committing adultery, it is proper for me to divorce her because of the exception for fornication.

Rich. This is where much of the liberal church goes in error these days. Instead of seeking advice friom the bible, they seek the views of other fallible men, or of their pastor.

The advcice that you can just leave your wife and marry another because God is love and will forgive you is from the devil. We must never sin because we know God will forgive us. I would suggest you click on this link and read this article along with bible in hand.

http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/divorce.shtml

It's so easy for everyone to tell you that scripture permits you to divorce, but you need to validate that from scripture yourself. I hope this will help in your search for the truth.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Sandy on October 17, 2003, 10:49:36 AM
Rich,

The easiest thing to do is to point an accusing finger of blame at your wife, and seek to find those who will validate, Biblically, why you have every right to divorce a sinful adulteress.  Even a well meaning pastor, in his ignorance has given you cause for divorce.

The second easiest thing to do is to treat your wife in such an unloving, and unforgiving way that she finally feels that there is nothing left to do, but to seek for divorce.  You are vindicated, after all does not the Bible tell us that if the unbeliever chooses to separate from the marriage covenant then you are free from bondage?  

The hard thing, and God honoring thing to do is to forgive, and truly love your wife the way that Christ loves, and gave Himself for His Church.  Contrary to popular opinion love is NOT something we fall in and out of.  When asked how often we are to forgive one who offends us, Christ' answer leaves no doubt we are ALWAYS to forgive.  

When you speak of your wives sin, I can understand your pain and anger.  But just because she is the one who committed this sin that does not leave you blameless.  Perhaps you should ask yourself why your wife needed another man to give her whatever lacked in your marriage?  Was, and is there real communication between the two of you?  Did you put your wife and her needs, and wants always first?  I don't know all the details, but I do know that love is a committment, and it takes long, hard effort.  When a husband truly loves his wife, in a way that honors God, then she would have no reason to feel anything but that love.  

Just try it Gods way, and see what happens.  You just may be surprised at how close you and your wife can become.  And the loving relationship the two of you can build together is well worth all the hard work.  You will be glad that you did it God's way...Biblically.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Layla on October 18, 2003, 09:10:23 AM
"Romans 8:2  For THE LAW of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from THE LAW of sin and death.

Did you catch that? The Law has made me free from The Law. Ironic, no?

Romans 8:3-4. For what THE LAW could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,  that the righteous requirement of THE LAW might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Did you catch that? What The Law could not do, God did, so that the righteous requirement might be fulfilled. What righteous requirement? The righteous requirement of THE LAW. Those who walk according to the Spirit FULFILL/ESTABLISH the law. They do not make void the law, they establish it. They do so by GOD'S SPIRIT. This is THE LAW of the Spirit life in Christ Jesus. This is the newness of the Spirit. To be able to fulfill the law by GOD DOING IT. This is the better promises that are given in the New Covenant. The "flesh" due to it's weakness is not required to fulfill the law by it's feeble power or attempt. The body is promised to fulfill the law by the power and might of the HOLY SPIRIT poured upon all flesh.

The law is spiritual. That which is spiritual is ETERNAL. The law is eternal. I am carnal, not the law. The law exposes my carnality, my weakness. The law WITNESSES to the righteousness of GOD not the righteousness of man.

Ro 3:21  But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,

The Law is the The Law. It is a double edge sword. It kills and makes alive. It decreases the outward man while increasing the inward man.

Romans 7:25. I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin."  [o'toole]    

What did Christ say about the law.

Mat 22:36-40     Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.   
   
Jhn 13:34-35     A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.  By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.    
   
Jhn 15:10-12     If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.  These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and [that] your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.    

Love one another as I have loved you.  Pretty powerful!.  Rich I would bet if you loved your wife like Christ has loved you, you wouldn't be thinking divorce but rather looking towards problem solving, not thinking separation but reconciliation.  When we are faithful and obedient to this commandment then we abide in Him and when we abide in Him we fulfill the requirements of the Law because He fulfilled the requirements of the Law, not because of any act on our part, but because of His righteousness.

This is what I mean by binding someone to the law.  This is what I mean by the difference between faithfulness and obedience and a works doctrine.

Peace,
Layla
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Rich Aikers on October 19, 2003, 04:51:38 PM
Quote
The easiest thing to do is to point an accusing finger of blame at your wife, and seek to find those who will validate, Biblically, why you have every right to divorce a sinful adulteress.  Even a well meaning pastor, in his ignorance has given you cause for divorce.

The second easiest thing to do is to treat your wife in such an unloving, and unforgiving way that she finally feels that there is nothing left to do, but to seek for divorce.  You are vindicated, after all does not the Bible tell us that if the unbeliever chooses to separate from the marriage covenant then you are free from bondage?  

This sounds like you are blaming me when the wife is the one who went out and committed adultery? You say the easiest thing to do is to point an accusing finger of blame at your wife? Yes, she's the one committing adultery, not me. Why would I accuse myself of adultery? What am I supposed to do, just go home with her as she is with who knows who, who knows when? Isn't there some middle ground here?

I have read the post and it does give me something to think about. But what if the wife continues in her adulterous activity?




Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on October 19, 2003, 07:19:25 PM
I suggest that you read Tony Warren's study on divorce and remarriage at http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/divorce.html (http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/divorce.html)

I will pray for you and your wife.

Erik Diamond
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: stacia on November 09, 2003, 06:42:15 AM
Dear All,
 
If a person divorces his wife and gets married again before he is saved what will be he called after getting saved a man with one wife or two wives?
The man is living with his present wife alone.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: John on November 09, 2003, 12:01:22 PM
The assumption is that there is such a thing as 'divorce', that in some manner we can actually separate the joining of a man and a woman in marriage. Man cannot do this.

Mar 10:9  what therefore God did join together, let not man put asunder.'  

Though divorced people remarry, they are under the delusion that what God has ordained can be overthrown by state or federal laws permitting divorce. We can make divorce legal, homosexuality legal, abortion legal, adultery, and fornication legal. However, God has not -- man cannot change the Law of God by passing his own laws.

Mar 10:8  and they shall be--the two--for one flesh; so that they are no more two, but one flesh;  

Marriage then is the spiritual union of the man and woman, they are no more two but one flesh in the eyes of God. This God ordained union could not be separated except by death of the spouse, thereby breaking the bond that joins them.

Rom 7:2  For the married woman was bound by Law to the living husband; but if the husband dies, she is set free from the Law of the husband.  

1Co 7:39  A wife is bound by law for as long a time as her husband lives; but if her husband sleeps, she is free to be married to whomever she desires, only in the Lord.  

If the Bible is our guide, and not the imagination of man, then if we have married a second wife (or husband) while our first still lives we have committed adultery against the spouse and now have two wives (husbands). We cannot undo this sin by divorcing, for there is no such thing (except in our imagination). Sin cannot be remedied by more sin. Remaining married to the second spouse as long as they live is the Biblical course of action. The first wife/husband should not remarry to avoid further sin.

Mar 10:11  and he saith to them, `Whoever may put away his wife, and may marry another, doth commit adultery against her;  

It is not that adultery can be forgiven so let us divorce and remarry and ask forgiveness later. Thinking that way would expose an unfaithful and rebellious heart -- testifying against you. Rather, if we are divorced, seek to be reconciled ... barring that, do not remarry.

1Co 7:11  but if indeed she is separated, remain unmarried, or be reconciled to the husband; and a husband not to leave his wife.  

Bottom line: No divorce is permitted or provided for under the law of God. You should seek to be reconciled, unless you have bound yourself to another spouse, in which case you must remain. Seeking divorce is sin and should not be winked at presuming that forgiveness can be found later. A lawless heart may be indicative of a dead spirit -- it is no small matter to shake the fist at God seeking your own will. For those contemplating divorce -- knowing you seek rebellion -- repent and obey! What do you profit if you get what you seek -- divorce or remarriage -- and lose something eternally precious.

Mar 8:36  For what shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?  

If you were slaves of Christ then be obedient to Him, divorce is not difficult to understand, but perhaps difficult when we seek our own carnal desires, so Obey God.

Rom 6:16  Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves as slaves for obedience, you are slaves to whom you obey, whether of sin to death, or obedience to righteousness?

john
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: andreas on November 10, 2003, 01:57:19 AM
Divorce is not an option for the christian whose marriage is troubled.The Lord hates divorce.Malachi 2:14-16 .The way out is repentance,confession of sin,forgiveness,reconciliation,the will to love,and changed behaviour.Hard is it?Not as hard as it was for God to maintain His marriage to you at Golgotha.Lets not conveniently forget that Moses permitted men to divorce because of hardness of their hearts. Matt.19:9
andreas. 8)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Robert63 on February 14, 2004, 09:18:36 AM
Dan,
  You certainly cannot judge biblical christians by the acts of one man. Oral Roberts is not representative of either reformed, or biblical christians.



Yeah but a lot of good people respect high profile conservative people like George Bush, Rush Linbaugh, and Bob Jones, and so when they do things which are unethical, dishonest or unbiblical, it puts a bad light on all conservative christians. Don't you think that is true?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 28, 2004, 11:11:04 PM
The assumption is that there is such a thing as 'divorce', that in some manner we can actually separate the joining of a man and a woman in marriage. Man cannot do this.

Mar 10:9  what therefore God did join together, let not man put asunder.'  

Though divorced people remarry, they are under the delusion that what God has ordained can be overthrown by state or federal laws permitting divorce. We can make divorce legal, homosexuality legal, abortion legal, adultery, and fornication legal. However, God has not -- man cannot change the Law of God by passing his own laws.

Mar 10:8  and they shall be--the two--for one flesh; so that they are no more two, but one flesh;  

If the Bible is our guide, and not the imagination of man, then if we have married a second wife (or husband) while our first still lives we have committed adultery against the spouse and now have two wives (husbands). We cannot undo this sin by divorcing, for there is no such thing (except in our imagination). Sin cannot be remedied by more sin. Remaining married to the second spouse as long as they live is the Biblical course of action. The first wife/husband should not remarry to avoid further sin.

Mar 10:11  and he saith to them, `Whoever may put away his wife, and may marry another, doth commit adultery against her;  

It is not that adultery can be forgiven so let us divorce and remarry and ask forgiveness later. Thinking that way would expose an unfaithful and rebellious heart -- testifying against you. Rather, if we are divorced, seek to be reconciled ... barring that, do not remarry.

1Co 7:11  but if indeed she is separated, remain unmarried, or be reconciled to the husband; and a husband not to leave his wife.  

Bottom line: No divorce is permitted or provided for under the law of God. You should seek to be reconciled, unless you have bound yourself to another spouse, in which case you must remain. john

Hi John,

I have to disagree with you here.   You posted Rom. 7:2-3.   In that scripture Paul states that a woman will be called an adulteress if she remarry as long as her husband is alive........

That shows that she is in a state of CONTINUAL adultery because in God's eyes, she is not "joined" with this new husband, she belongs to another-----hence the label of "adulteress".

You rightly said in your opening statements that MAN cannot undo what God has joined.   He can commit sin against what has been joined (adultery----which is what Jesus calls a second marriage).   How does one repent of adultery------they leave it.   I don't quite understand how many teach that a person should stay in a relationship Jesus called adultery----not marriage.   Yes, our culture calls it a marriage, but does God?   Blessings in Jesus, Cindy :)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 28, 2004, 11:30:36 PM
Sandy,

I just want to say GREAT posts!!  I have seen EXACTLY the same things in the studies on marriage/divorce I have been doing for the past 2 years.   I truly believe the Lord is opening up more and more of our eyes to the Truth and how far the Church has fallen from it in our quest for "happiness".........Thanks for standing for that Truth.   Blessings in Jesus, Cindy :)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: prover2 on March 02, 2004, 10:58:12 PM
I am struggling with the issue of divorce and am looking for your views on the issue. My pastor tells me that in the case of my wife committing adultery, it is proper for me to divorce her because of the exception for fornication.

"And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." Matthew 18:9

I don't want to stay with her because I don't really trust her anymore, but this leaves me wanting to accept that advice, but with my conscience bothering me. What is the christian thing to do. Is it lawful for me to divorce her because of this?
---------------------------------------------------

The Christian thing to do is to forgive her.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on March 05, 2004, 12:21:15 AM
Quote
Hello Layla, you hit the nail head on. when his wife
commited adultery, she left him. He is free and He is divorced.  
Peace Earl
Quote

What do you do with Mt. 19:9?   In that passage which many say shows the "exception clause" allowing for remarriage------the husband has committed adultery (remarriage) and the left wife is not allowed to remarry without committing sin as would the 2nd husband...............Just a thought.   Blessings in Jesus, cindy :)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Mr Earl on March 07, 2004, 10:21:02 PM
What do you do with Mt. 19:9?  In that passage which many say shows the "exception clause" allowing for remarriage------the husband has committed adultery (remarriage) and the left wife is not allowed to remarry without committing sin as would the 2nd husband...............Just a thought.  Blessings in Jesus, cindy

Hi cindy
Read Matthew 18:9 again. 'And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, {the except clause here is the point}otherwise I agree with you, however, But you said the husband had committed adultry, in which cause she is divorced. Peace Earl

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Gilda on March 08, 2004, 12:57:12 PM

otherwise I agree with you, however, But you said the husband had committed adultry, in which cause she is divorced. Peace Earl


I don't follow you. How does a husband comitting adultery equal divorce? Or maybe I misunderstood you. Do you mean that when that happens, they are automatically divorced?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Mr Earl on March 08, 2004, 02:35:36 PM

otherwise I agree with you, however, But you said the husband had committed adultry, in which cause she is divorced. Peace Earl


I don't follow you. How does a husband comitting adultery equal divorce? Or maybe I misunderstood you. Do you mean that when that happens, they are automatically divorced?


Why is it that we think only a woman can commit adultery?  

Do you mean that when that happens, they are automatically divorced? Yes.

Peace, Earl
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Mr Earl on March 08, 2004, 02:38:41 PM

otherwise I agree with you, however, But you said the husband had committed adultry, in which cause she is divorced. Peace Earl


I don't follow you. How does a husband comitting adultery equal divorce? Or maybe I misunderstood you. Do you mean that when that happens, they are automatically divorced?

By his actions he both, committe sin and broke the Marriage Covenant.

Peace Earl
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: judykanova on March 08, 2004, 02:39:52 PM
I lifted this from Bradley's post on Revelations 17,
because it struck me as helping to also explain why, on this side of the cross, divorce is no longer an option:

ę Revelations Chapter 17, Reply #2 on 3/8/04 @10:23am from BradleyĽ
Quote
Ephesians 5:30-33
30  For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31  For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32  This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
33  Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

In this passage Paul gives us spiritual truths to apply to our marriages, but these same truths are applied to the church.  He clearly says he is speaking about Christ and the church who are to be joined together into one body and one flesh.

I think part of the confusion which arises concerning what some are referring to as the 'exception clause', is that Christ had not yet gone to the cross, thus mending the 'breach' between man and God, as symbolized by the (miraculous) rendng of the veil in the temple.

Matt 27:50-51
50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

Heb 6:19-20
19 Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;
20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Heb 9:2-15
2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; ...
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. ...
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

To allow divorce within marriage -- which is an earthly representation of Christ and His bride the church -- would be altogether inconsistent with the teachings of the Bible concerning Christ's fulfilment of the law on our behalf, removing the partition between us and God.  But moreover, this would be in opposition to the many assurances in God's Word that He will 'never leave us nor forsake us'.

Heb 13:4-6
4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
5 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.
6 So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me.

Notice please how marriage is directly linked to Christ's statement that He will "never leave.. nor forsake" us.

judy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on March 08, 2004, 07:26:54 PM
Hi cindy
Read Matthew 18:9 again. 'And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, {the except clause here is the point}otherwise I agree with you, however, But you said the husband had committed adultry, in which cause she is divorced. Peace Earl

I don't see that at all.   What I see is that a husband WRONGLY put away his wife and committed adultery against her by marrying another(which appears scripturally to be a CONTINUAL state of sin---Rom. 7:2-3, I Cor. 7:39).    What I also see is that the innocent wife is told she will sin (commit adultery) should she remarry (Mt. 5:32)----and any man who "takes" her will be guilty of adultery.    How could that be so if God had dissolved the marriage due to adultery?   I see absolutely no provision for her to remarry in spite of her husband's adultery.  I see in this passage that they both still belong to one another in God's eyes.

You say adultery equates to divorce.   Do you believe if someone commits adultery they are then divorced-----even if the offended one wants reconciliation?    Do you also believe scripture teaches that divorce and dissolution are one and the same thing?    If you read I Cor. 7:10-11 it appears the woman who "departs" from her husband is divorced, yet, Paul still calls him "her husband" and tells her she must remain unmarried or be reconciled to him.   No provision for remarriage to another and it appears that Paul is speaking on an issue Jesus already addressed-------Paul expounding on it here in this passage.   Blessings in Jesus, Cindy :)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Chris on March 09, 2004, 04:42:19 AM
I don't follow you. How does a husband comitting adultery equal divorce? Or maybe I misunderstood you. Do you mean that when that happens, they are automatically divorced?

By his actions he both, committe sin and broke the Marriage Covenant.

Peace Earl

Where does the bible say that?

That's so easy to say, but where is your biblical foundation for making such a law? You can't just make up reasons why people can marry when God says that you can't marry a divorced person.

 Matt 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Carmel on March 09, 2004, 04:59:29 AM
Hi,

 I would like to know if the Lord has joined Moslems together in their marriage as in---

(Mat 19:6)  "So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."



 

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on March 09, 2004, 07:49:04 AM
Quote
>>>
Hi,
I would like to know if the Lord has joined Muslims together in their marriage as in---

(Mat 19:6)  "So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."
<<<

The answer is yes, God has joined Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists, Hinduism, etc., through the law established in the beginning of man and wife.  God is the God of all creation, not just believers. Just as all people are subject to the laws of God (and thus the judgment) and not just believers, God has a creation order or morality. And all His creation has this "God breathed morality" inherently within them.

Romans 1:19-20

All men, having been originally created in the image of God, inherently know there is a God (whether they will admit to it or not), and know that there is an order of things. A marriage is the joining of husband and wife into a one flesh. Do you think marriage in every country just "evolved" mysteriously?

The marriage covenant was instituted at creation, not in the Law of Moses as many believe. When a man leaves father and mother and takes a wife (Christian or not), they automatically enter into a Covenant or promise before God as being together as one flesh. And this was instituted from the beginning.

Genesis 2:23-24

So if anyone talks about Marriage being instituted by Moses, they don't know what they are talking about. Indeed, Christ spoke of this when speaking about marriage. That a man and women in this covenant relationship cleaves [dabaq], or are joined together to be as one flesh, and He noted it was a creation ordinance. This is illustrated again in Matthew:

Matthew 19:4-6

Clearly God is referencing the creation ordinance marriage Covenant which was instituted long before Job, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Israel, or the Church, and is declaring they were joined together before God, and also plainly commands that man should never pull them apart.

So you see it isn't God who is ambiguous about a marriage, it is man who looks for every little opportunity to turn to the right hand, and to the left, in order to avoid God's truths.
 
nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Oneil on March 09, 2004, 04:39:01 PM
Why is it that we think only a woman can commit adultery?  

Do you mean that when that happens, they are automatically divorced? Yes.

Peace, Earl

I didn't read anyone say that. And everyone I know understands very well that both women and men commit adultery. Who thinks that only women commit adultery?

I believe that you are just saying a lot of things without any real thought being put into it. Adultery does not break a marriage, divorce breaks the marriage. Adultery and divorce are two separate acts. If what you believe was true, then there would be no need for a writing of divorcement at all. But it was required in the old testament.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Slingshot on March 09, 2004, 09:04:16 PM
Quote
Adultery does not break a marriage, divorce breaks the marriage.

Hi Oneil,
You are correct in saying that adultery does not break the marriage but I believe you are wrong when you say that divorce does. Divorce doesn't break the marriage. If it did then why would it be adultery to remarry or marry one who has been divorced. It makes no sense

Mattew 19:9
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Many people, without reading carefully the previous 8 verses, read "except it be for fornication" and think they're free to divorce, but they are wrong. If it were true than Jesus is talking out both sides of his mouth.

Also think about what that law of Moses meant.

Matthew 19:8
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

It means that one who uses this "exception clause" has a hard heart. A true christian doesn't have a hard heart.

Ezekiel 11:19
And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:

The only thing that breaks a marriage is death. And that is why it is the only way one can remarry without committing adultery.

1 Corinthians 7:39
The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

Of course that applies to the husband as well.

This is what I believe God's word says, If I'm wrong please show with scripture.

Steve

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Shirley on March 14, 2004, 04:38:24 AM
Yeah but a lot of good people respect high profile conservative people like George Bush, Rush Linbaugh, and Bob Jones, and so when they do things which are unethical, dishonest or unbiblical, it puts a bad light on all conservative christians. Don't you think that is true?


Yes, I think that it does. But that can't be helped. We can only be responsible for ourselves. These others who certainly do not represent good christians will have to answer for themselves.

As far as divorce being a necessary evil, I think that is a contradiction in terms. Evil is not necessary. Neither is divorce if the two people deal with their marriage as God calls for us to deal with it. As he loves the church.

 Colossians 3:18-19  "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.  Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them."

Husbands are not abiding by god's instructions, and neither are wives.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Robert Powell on March 14, 2004, 02:22:54 PM

 Colossians 3:18-19  "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.  Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them."

Husbands are not abiding by god's instructions, and neither are wives.


Amen. That's the crucial point of the matter. You are so right. No one wants to do it the way God would have us do it anymore. No one wants it for better or worse anymore. When things get a little rough, they just want to start all over with someone else as if they were trading in a tempermental car.

 Ephesians 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: InChristAlone on March 24, 2004, 09:55:12 PM
Hi Dan, why do you focus on man and forgetting to focus on God and His Holy word?


It seems to me that those who say divorce is unbiblical are hypocrites.

Take fundamentalist preacher Oral Roberts. He is a good example of this. He set high biblical standards for his university (ORU). He has even said that if you are overweight, you cannot attend. I'm a little overweight, and because of that I would have been rejected for admission (not that I would have ever applied).

Likewise, at ORU a divorced person found themselves just as rejected. But Oral Robert's son married a woman who had big problems with the ministry. In the end, the son divorced her and with Oral Robert's blessings. That is what I am talking about with the hypocricy of fundamentals.

And if you wondered how Oral would deal with the heir to all his possessions now that this irreversible action had been done, he simply did what all fundamentalists do. The son wrote a book claiming that he had lost his salvation. The book was called "Second Chance" It went on to say that He was resaved and then remarried another woman more compatible to the honesty standards of Oral. Talk about your self serving fundamentalists, is this not hypocricy?

It seems to me the son dropped his pants, and everyone at ORU is pretending they did not see it. Where are all those charismatic fundamentalist standards on this issue. They went right out the window.

The point is, divorce is an evil thing until you want one. Then it becomes a necessary thing. Don't be a hypocrite and tell others they can't do what you would do.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Wanda on August 09, 2004, 04:52:23 AM
Divorce a Necessary Evil

That is an unfortunate choice of words. I take it that you mean that it's something that is wrong, but God allows?

Quote
It seems to me that those who say divorce is unbiblical are hypocrites.
Take fundamentalist preacher Oral Roberts. He is a good example of this. He set high biblical standards for his university (ORU). He has even said that if you are overweight, you cannot attend. I'm a little overweight, and because of that I would have been rejected for admission (not that I would have ever applied).

Likewise, at ORU a divorced person found themselves just as rejected. But Oral Robert's son married a woman who had big problems with the ministry. In the end, the son divorced her and with Oral Robert's blessings. That is what I am talking about with the hypocricy of fundamentals.

Let me ask you a question. Do you think that this person represents good biblical christians? You cannot judge christians by the actions of this man. each christian stands and falls on his own actions, not those of high profile people.


Quote
The point is, divorce is an evil thing until you want one. Then it becomes a necessary thing. Don't be a hypocrite and tell others they can't do what you would do.

I can only speak for myself. I know that staying in a terrible or abusive situation is a very hard thing to do. So I don't ever tell anyone never to divorce. Because what's a woman to do when she is being beaten daily? It's easy for men to say stay there and take it when they can't even take a verbal insult without coming to blows or getting into a fight.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: FaithFilly on December 20, 2004, 12:24:48 PM
I don't ever tell anyone never to divorce. Because what's a woman to do when she is being beaten daily?
To be God's child is to be of like mind.  God joins two people as one flesh when married and commands us to not permit divorce:
Quote
Matthew 19:6  Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
What's a woman to do when beaten daily?
Quote
1 Peter 2:18-21  Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.  For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.  For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps
To be married to a froward spouse is a test of faith no different than being required to step inside a burning fiery furnace.  For a believer seek a divorce to put an end to suffering is to not trust that God is able to deliver you from the trial He set before you.  Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were bound with ropes.  We are bound to God's will with "ropes of faith."  If one is terminally ill and suffers great pain during this illness, is it God's will to end life before God does?
Quote
Daniel 3:17-18† If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.
Even if a woman departs from her husband and remains "unmarried," it does not mean that she put away her husband and it also does not mean that she put away her "burning fiery furnace."  The trial continues as most people who have experienced separation know.  One can "depart" and "unmarry" from a television set, but yet still not "put it away."  To put something or someone away is permanent without any hope of reconciliation.  Because we can not judge what God's providence is, it is not up to us to decide upon putting away someone permanently out of our life and/or putting our own self away out of this life.
Quote
1 Corinthians 7:11-16  But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
If a wife puts her husband away permanently (instead of just de-parting), then how can that man have any chance he may be won by the behavior of his wife (who returns good for evil)? 
Quote
1 Peter 3:1  Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives
It's natural to be willing to stay with someone who returns good for good, but it is supernatural to be willing to stay with someone who returns evil for good.  Christ gave us His good (righteousness) in replacement of our evil (no self-righteousness in us) so we in turn could do the same for others in hopes that it's God's will they too be saved.  Our reconciliation with God cost Christ His blood.  Following Him can cost us our life, but if it does...our reward will be priceless.  God always rewards faith...always!
Most people would be surprised to learn though that women who endure suffering by the hand of their spouse and refuse to step outside of God's will by seeking a divorce actually receive more shame from those in the world than what their abusive husband could ever dish out.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Gilda on January 19, 2005, 04:19:57 PM

Tony,
  I'm as much against divorce as the next person, but you seem to have limited divorce to only old testament saints. Why do you think they are better than us today?

Divorce is justified in certain instances, and so that means there is the possibility of remarriage. Why would you condemn a person to a life alone? It would be really cruel to deny divorce to christians that are unhappy with their present situation and want to make a new life for themselves with anothers. Why can't a wife divorce her drunkard and irresponsible husband? What is the law against that?

Matt. 19:9 "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery."

Another point is that I know you are wrong because even the Westminster confession allows for divorce for fornication. Surely you are not greater than these men to know better.

Personally, I think divorce can be justified (i.e., is not a sin), where the other partner will not support his wife monitarily, or has committed adultery, or has separated himself from her, or beats her. It seems to me that these are all good reasons for divorce so that the wife can move on with her life.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on January 20, 2005, 02:33:24 PM
>>>
Tony,
  I'm as much against divorce as the next person, but you seem to have limited divorce to only old testament saints. Why do you think they are better than us today?
<<<

First, I've moved this message to a more appropriate divorce and remarriage thread.

Second, they are neither better nor worse than us. Old Testament Israel was permitted by the law of Moses to do certain things because of the hardness of their heart. In their hardness, we see the shadow of the Old Covenant law that came to fulfillment in New Covenant realities. i.e., the Saturday Sabbath in Christ's rest, the Passover in the death of Christ, the sin of murder is in hating your brother, mere lust is adultery, etc., etc. The point being, the Old Testament law was not understood by Old Testament Israel. By the Spirit we understand that no one could have ever kept the law of God perfectly because it consisted of more than the 10 commandments, divorce ordinances covering fornication, or promises about the land of Canaan. It consisted of spiritual truths like Old Covenant Israel having to be legally divorced because of the hardness of their heart, so that New Covenant Israel could be made Christ's unconditional bride. Law versus Grace! Conditional versus Unconditional!

No it's not a matter of Old Covenant saints being better than us today because they could divorce for fornication under Moses law, it is about New Covenant saints understanding that we would never want to be under the law of Moses, and that from the beginning divorce was not what God intended. Today, we would never divorce our wives because we are to love them unconditionally as Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it not because she merited it, but unconditionally.


Quote
>>>
Divorce is justified in certain instances, and so that means there is the possibility of remarriage.
<<<

What scripture (chapter and verse please) says that anyone can remarry, except in a case where the spouse has died? There is no such scripture. Sure, we have Pastors, Ministers and Theologians "reading into" scripture all of these man-made exceptions to God's law, but God has nothing to do with it. They are putting words into God's mouth, "adding" to what He has inspired written.

Matthew 5:32

Christ says we cannot marry a divorced person, else we are committing adultery. He didn't say unless she was divorced because of fornication, or desertion, or unhappiness, or a lack of support, or abuse. That's man's addition to God's word. And if we want to add to God's word, we better add the plagues as well.


Quote
>>>
Why would you condemn a person to a life alone?
<<<

Condemn to a Life alone? When we apply ourselves to keep God's word faithfully, we are never alone. By contrast, when we rationalize and forsake His Covenant precepts, we will be alone even though we are in the midst of a crowd.

Matthew 28:20
Hebrews 13:5


Being strong in the Lord wherein we are obedient to God's commandments concerning divorce and remarriage, does not "condemn" a person to a life alone (contrary to popular belief). Nothing could be further from the truth. As indeed the Apostle Paul himself testifies.

1st Corinthians 7:7-8

It is the foolishness of the world to look upon Paul's single life as a life where he is condemned to be alone, and not the wisdom of God. This is the wrong "world view" my friend, because being single/unmarried is not condemnation in any sense, it is the thinking that is inherent in the foolishness of humanism.

1st Corinthians 3:18

The way of the world may "seem" to be the wise thing when we are brainwashed to think like the world does, but with the mind of Christ it is seen to be foolish. Because the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, "He taketh the wise in their own craftiness."

Moreover, you should know that no true Christian is ever alone. So that any argument from the basis of "self-pity" or "sympathy" or "narcissism" is also without Biblical validation. A person who is single should not spend their time feeling sorry for themselves or placing themselves on a pedestal, but humbling themselves and looking at this as more of an opportunity to serve the Lord. It's not un-compassionate to say that the spouse should take their eyes of themselves, and put them on Christ. It is what true agape "love" is all about. If we had more of this love, we would have less divorce because people would be serving the Lord rather than themselves. Unfortunately, man is a selfish and self-serving being.


Quote
>>>
It would be really cruel to deny divorce to Christians that are unhappy with their present situation and want to make a new life for themselves with anothers.
<<<

Are you saying Christians can now divorce because they are unhappy? I mean the list just keeps getting bigger and bigger. Pretty soon Christians will be able to divorce because their husbands shoes are the wrong color. I'm sorry to say, this is complete and utter nonsense and totally contrary to God's word. If they are Christian, they don't need to make a new life for themselves, because Christ has already given them a "new life" by regenerating them. We live now for Christ, not for ourselves. We are strangers and pilgrims here, just passing through. Today's unfaithful Christian has lost that sense that they are "set apart" for the service of God, and not just an extension of the world within the Church. Again, remaining single is not the end of the world scenario for Christians that you paint it out to be.

1st Corinthians 7:34-35

No, you are wrong. It wouldn't be really cruel to advise "anyone" against divorce, it would be really "commendable" unto God if more Pastors would advise that. Your idea that an unmarried person is somehow being punished, mentally tortured or treated cruelly is foreign to the bible. It's pure humanism and cannot be justified by scripture. The single life can be a blessing, because she/he that is married cares more for the things of the world and how they may please their spouse (God says). While those who are single will have more time to attend to the things of God. So God's doctrine and instruction in righteousness is different from the world's (self-centered) view. It's more of a God-centered view.

I'm well aware that no one wants to hear this these days, but all the more reason why they should. They are bombarded with the, "God is Love," or "God only wants you to be happy," or the "God will forgive you if you divorce" speeches. So a little tough love and truth in the Church once in a while is in order.


Quote
>>>
Why can't a wife divorce her drunkard and irresponsible husband?
<<<

Because he's her husband and they are joined together in one flesh, and because God says let not man pull that asunder. That use to be a good enough reason when there was more morality in the world, but in today's society it seems that the modern Christian looks for more than the "authority" of scripture. They look for the authority of feelings, the Pastor, the Minister and social workers. The fact is, the Lord "hates" divorce. This is something "He" says, not something I invented in order to keep wives with their husbands, and husbands with wives.

Malachi 2:16

God is immutable, and He flat out "hates" divorce or putting our spouses away. It is not an intangible, it's not compromise, it's not just a possibility and it's not debatable, God hates divorce.


Quote
>>>
What is the law against that?
<<<

You cannot build a doctrine from silence. The real question is, what law says that we can divorce our spouses if they are irresponsible and get drunk? The only "honest" answer is, there is no such law of God. If that was the case, then many of the saints would have been divorced, including Noah. But there is no such law, never has been, and never will be. That is just another "rationalization" borne out of the minds of men. Do Christians today really love God's law, or has the love grown as cold as an iceberg?

Psalms 119:97-104


Quote
>>>
Matt. 19:9 "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery."

Another point is that I know you are wrong because even the Westminster confession allows for divorce for fornication. Surely you are not greater than these men to know better.
<<<

First, contrary to how it may seem by listening to some Christians, the Westminster Confession is not the Bible. Gasp!.. Yes, that's exactly what I said.  Second, you are one hundred percent correct, I am greater than no one. Nevertheless, the passage of Matthew 19:9 has been greatly misunderstood by a great many people. And the reason is because man is a "humanistic" being by default, and thus usually seeks for avenues of digress when he "thinks" it is needed. The operative word being, "thinks."

Ephesians 5:24-25

We love our spouses as Christ loves the Church, sacrificially. When we sin, does Christ abandon us, break the Covenant with us, put us away and find someone better? God forbid. His love for His bride the Church is unconditional, not by merit (Grace). And we are commanded to love our spouse "even as Christ loved the Church." That love was the strongest love that can possibly be. So it follows that if we love our spouse as Christ loves the Church, when will we ever leave her or forsake her? These are the unadulterated truths that today's Christians do not want to face honestly.  We are to make the love which Christ had for the church the model if we will abide by the "authority" of the word of God. If not, then it's all a moot point.

The Phrase, "except it be for fornication," when taken in context, clearly shows that Christ is not saying divorce for fornication (as permitted by the law of Moses) is permissible, on the contrary. He is "referencing" that very law of Moses that allowed Divorce for fornication, and saying that from the beginning it was not to be so. i.e., this is not what God commands, it was given for the hardness of their heart, but was not to be so. Thus he has covered divorce for fornication as allowed by Moses. And divorce for anything except/besides fornication He says is adultery. So in the context of the question and the passage, we see He has covered all bases and answered them. Namely, they asked "Can there be divorce for any reason," and His answer is no. They ask what about the law of Moses, and He answers it was given by Moses for the hardness of your heart, but from the beginning was not to be.


Quote
>>>
Personally, I think divorce can be justified (i.e., is not a sin), where the other partner will not support his wife monetarily,
<<<

If that be true, then why does God "HATE" that which is not a sin? You say you think, but again "think" is the operative word. We can all think whatever we want, but unless we can justify it by "authority" of the word of God, then what we think is just what we want to believe. We can trust in what we think, or we can trust in what God says "as the authority" for our lives. One or the other, but not both. I quote this scripture a lot, but it's because so few people take it to heart. They don't want to trust God, they want to trust in their own understanding. Exactly the opposite of what God instructs.

Proverbs 3:5-8

There is no scripture that says a man/woman may divorce where the other is poor or has no money or will not support them monetarily as they are accustomed. Nothing that even comes close to saying that. Therefore it is a precept of men, not of God. A private interpretation, rather than God's declaration.


Quote
>>>
..or has committed adultery,
<<<

That's because you are not going by the "authority" of the word of God, but by what seems right in your own eyes.

Matthew 5:27-28

Say you slipped this morning and lusted just for a split micro-second after someone on TV. You are (by "authority" of the word) guilty before God of committing adultery. Can your husband now rightfully divorce you? It's not a pretend guilty, you are guilty according to God. Thus, under your supposition of divorce being justified for adultery, anyone (because everyone has had an impure thought at sometime in their lives) can divorce according to your law divorce for adultery..

Matthew 5:27-28

Thus saith the Lord. What say Ye? Wrong God?


Quote
>>>
..or has separated himself from her,
<<<

Separation is not a reason for divorce unless that separation is death.

1st Corinthians 7:39


Quote
>>>
..or beats her.
<<<

Perhaps you need to really consider 1st Peter, and advise Christians take their eyes off themselves, and place them on Christ! Its not all Me, Me, Me. Because it's "REAL" easy to take the self-centered, the worldly, the humanistic path, as is preached in all the social gospels today, but it's much more difficult (but more rewarding) to take the path God commands.

1st Peter 2:18-23

I know today's ministers would advise that servants not take this literally but rebel and free themselves from their cruel masters, but man's humanistic ways are not God's ways.


Quote
>>>
It seems to me that these are all good reasons for divorce so that the wife can move on with her life.
<<<

It may "seem to you" that they are all good reasons for divorce, and it may seem to others that these and more are all good reasons for divorce, but beware of what "seems" right in your own eyes. Without "authority" of scripture these are mere opinions, suppositions and private interpretations. Just another way to get around what God "actually" says about divorce. He hates it. We don't trample that under foot for the sake of what "seems" to be. He says what God has joined together in marriage we cannot pull apart. We don't hide that under a bushel or basket for the sake of what "seems" to be. He says when two are married, they are bound by the law so long as they live. What shall we say then? Wrong God? No, we go up to the mountain and proclaim it from the highest hill. And he that will hear will hear, and he that won't hear, will forbear.

Luke 8:16-18

By authority of scripture none of these are good reasons for divorce so that the wife can move on with her life. The Wife, if she is a Christian, already has a life that she has no desire to move on from. She reigns in this life as a king and priest unto God. What could be better than that? We are not in bondage to fear the single state, or think that this single life is some sort of condemnation (your words), but by the spirit we "live" unto Christ.

Romans 8:10-15

To live is Christ and to die is gain. Let us not forget that in our zeal for the temporal pleasures of this world.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Kyle on January 21, 2005, 03:32:37 AM
Tony, what the Bible really has to say about divorce remains controversial in the church. There are two sides to this issue. Those theologians who support divorce argue that Christ allows divorce for marital unfaithfulness, and so it just follows that God allows remarriage of the innocent party. A lot of theologians do claim that Paul allows divorce and remarriage following desertion because of 1 corinthians 7. On the other side of this issue is theologians like yourself who believe that the Bible teaches that marriage is a indissoluble bond. I think that we can agree that the scriptures are unclear on divorce, and so I think we really should give some slack to those pastors (many of whom are good reformed christians also) teaching that there are grounds for divorce.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on January 21, 2005, 09:54:54 AM
Quote
I think that we can agreee that the scriptures are unclear on divorce, and so I think we really should give some slack to those pastors (many of whom are good reformed christians also) teaching that there are grounds for divorce

Not true. God's Word on divorce is final authority. We either accept it or not, regardless what humanistic pastors said.  There are no such thing as "two sides to this issue", because God's Word is One and Only Authority.

Tony have given you all the scripture support to prove that divorce is not allowed for ANY ground as Jesus explained in Matthew 19. Yet, you do not have yet provide us the scripture that we could divorce for being beaten up, being poor, being emotional abuse, or even adultury. You, instead, used liberal and reformed pastors' teaching that we CAN divorce if we are not happy or found that our spouses are unfaithfully.

Scripture can never be 'unclear' on ANY issue as long as you have the ears to hear.

Erik Diamond




Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Kyle on January 22, 2005, 03:25:59 AM
divorce is not allowed for ANY ground as Jesus explained in Matthew 19. Yet, you do not have yet provide us the scripture that we could divorce for being beaten up, being poor, being emotional abuse, or even adultury. You, instead, used liberal and reformed pastors' teaching that we CAN divorce if we are not happy or found that our spouses are unfaithfully.


Erik Diamond,
 first of all I said that what the Bible really has to say about divorce remains controversial in the church. There are two sides to this issue. Surely you don't argue with that.

 Those theologians who support divorce argue that Christ allows divorce for fornication, and so they say that God allows remarriage of the innocent party. A lot of theologians do say that Paul allows divorce and remarriage following desertion because of 1 corinthians 7. If you have some scripture that proves otherwise, just post it.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on January 23, 2005, 09:02:26 AM
>>>
Tony, what the Bible really has to say about divorce remains controversial in the church.
<<<

Well, I'll agree that it may be a clash of opposing views with men, but with God there is no controversy. And we are not to be led by the conflicting views of men, we are to be led by the "authoritative and infallible" word of the living God. We should live for Christ, not for ourselves, for we are bought with a price. Too many Christians have forgotten their first love.

Acts 17:28
Psalms 119:104-105

It is the light of the word of God that should guide our paths, instead it is the religious declension and spiritual back-sliding of Pastors and Church leaders. You know that there is no controversy about God hating divorce, the controversy is with men on how to turn to the right hand and to the left in order to get around such declarations of God.


Quote
>>>
There are two sides to this issue.
<<<

True! And it isn't your side, or his side, or my side. The two sides are God's side, which man shows evidence of being on by his obedience. And Satan's side, which man shows evidence of being on by his disobedience. We are the man of law-fulness or we are the man of law-lessness (2 thessalonians 2:3) led by one of two opposing spirits.

Matthew 19:8

What side do we stand on? Do we stand with Jesus in understanding that God never intended for the marriage Covenant (Oath) to ever be broken, or do we stand with the Pharisees of old and the Pastors of new, who seek by the law to pull apart what God never intended to be pulled apart? Yes, there are two sides to this issue. Where do we stand, is the question.


Quote
>>>
Those theologians who support divorce argue that Christ allows divorce for marital unfaithfulness, and so it just follows that God allows remarriage of the innocent party.
<<<

First, a remarriage doesn't "just follow" a divorce. Scripture "commands" those separated from their husbands that they should remain unmarried or else be reconciled with them. That's God's word. Second, there are no innocent parties. We are all guilty of something, "he that is without sin let him cast the first stone." Third, there is nothing in scripture that allows for remarriage following a divorce. People/Christians can say anything they want, but their lack of Biblical validation is manifest in their not producing any plain scripture that makes such a declaration, or that even "righteously" implies such.

In Luke we see Christ again deal with this issue of remarriage of divorced people, and it couldn't be clearer. Jesus states the truth in plain and unambiguous language. Those who divorce their wives and marry others are guilty of committing adultery, and those who marry divorced people are guilty of committing adultery

Luke 16:18

Where is there room for any rational debate? I don't see how it could be said any more plainly, do you? Jesus warns that both the divorced man who remarries is committing adultery, and the single man that marries anyone that is divorced is committing adultery. i.e., remarriage of the divorced is out of the question according to the "authoritative" word of God. And we see Paul, under inspiration of God, reiterate that same principle in 1st Corinthians when he declaring that divorced people must remain single.

1st Corinthians 7:10-11

Let the wife not depart from her husband. Is that unambiguous enough for Pastors? God says in plain language, Do Not Do It! How clearer can it get? Then in the next verse God puts the hammer down on anyone who may have gotten divorced and is thinking of remarriage. He says in that case she is to either remain single, or else be reunited with her husband. Again, what is ambiguous about that? And He finishes off by saying, the husband also is not to get divorced. You see this is all perfectly understandable unless we are predisposed to wresting it because of the weakness of the flesh.


Quote
>>>
A lot of theologians do claim that Paul allows divorce and remarriage following desertion because of 1 Corinthians 7.
<<<

A lot of theologians claim all sorts of things in the name of Christ, but they are not true, are they? A lot of theologians believe scripture teaches dispensationalism, but do you believe it does? I can't stress enough that the point is not what Pastors say, what Theologians say, what the Westminster confession says, what this great Author said, or what I say, the point is, what does God say! And this seems to be a point that is becoming increasingly harder and harder for Christians to understand in these last days. They just don't seem to get it anymore.

As for the so-called Pauline privilege that Pastors unjustly declare allows remarriage if there is a desertion, it is not validated by any sound consideration of what the text of that scripture actually says. First of all it speaks of an unbelieving husband and how the wife is not to leave him. God says the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and an unbelieving wife sanctified by the husband. Nothing there about divorce. Then we read in the next verse:

1st Corinthians 7:15

It says if an unbelieving spouse depart, let them leave, the Christian is not under bondage to them in such cases. It says nothing about the marriage BOND or Binding being broken. It says if he departs let him. It says nothing about now you can divorce and remarry. That is man "reading into scripture" something that is not there. It is speaking about the believing spouse not being under bondage that they must follow. And before anyone thinks in error about this word, the Greek word bondage used here is an entirely different word from the word bound and has an entirely different meaning.[/b] Pastors today often do a "sleight of hand trick" and attempt to confuse the issue by substituting the word "bound" here where it is not, and where it doesn't belong. For example look in the verses later in the chapter where God "DOES" speaks the marriage and single people, and He inspired used the appropriate word. e.g.,

1st Corinthians 7:26-28

This Greek word is the word God uses for the marriage bond because it mean secured by bands. It is the Greek word [deo] literally meaning to be tied (Romans 7:2), or to bind something together. That's what marriage is. A Binding together that cannot be broken. The word concerning obligation in verse 14 is the entirely different Greek word [douloo], meaning to be enslaved or under bondage. So God is telling the believer they don't have to be enslaved to the unbeliever who wants to depart. This word has nothing whatsoever to do with allowing divorce, and says not one single thing about remarriage. Again, the marriage bond is an entirely different word with an entirely different meaning. That a believer can let an unbeliever go because they are not enslaved to them has nothing to do with divorce. Another example is found further down to verse 39 where God against speaks of the bond of marriage and the only way it is loosed. Note again the Greek word He uses discussing this.

1st Corinthians 7:39

Again God reiterates that the two are tied or bound together by the marriage law as long as they live. This again is the Greek word [deo], unlike the word enslaved [douloo], which we find in the so-called Pauline privilege. It is revealed in truth to be more like the Pastor's privilege. For the Apostle Paul didn't author scripture, and this says nothing about divorce. pastors do, but the word of God does not.

So the clear intent of the verse is to allow the believing wife not to be enslaved to an unbeliever that they have to follow him when he leaves as a bondservant or slave would. In such a case, God has called them to peace (to not fight). There is nothing said there about divorce or remarriage. It is something unfaithful Pastors have "read into" the verse.


Quote
>>>
On the other side of this issue is theologians like yourself who believe that the Bible teaches that marriage is a indissoluble bond.
<<<

You mean that you believe the word doesn't teach that? Please explain the "plain" language that Christ used in saying the two are morphed into one flesh and cannot be separated? Please tell me what is ambiguous about that? Did God say that or did I unrighteously make that up?

Mark 10:8-9

But you see, there is no explaining this away and no denying God says this, because it clearly states that marriage is an indissoluble covenant bond of God wherein man is warned he should not break it. A" One flesh from two" flesh union Covenant. Does it change because someone denies that it is the truth, or implies that it is just someone's interpretation? No, God's word stands pure and sure.
 
Psalms 119:140
Proverbs 30:5

Thus what is written unambiguously is not just someone's interpretation, it is His pure word.


Quote
>>>
I think that we can agree that the scriptures are unclear on divorce, and so I think we really should give some slack to those pastors (many of whom are good reformed christians also) teaching that there are grounds for divorce.
<<<

You've said God's word is unclear about divorce, but I disagree totally. I don't believe God is unclear on this subject at all, in fact I've been quoting scripture that illustrates that God is not unclear on the topic. I think it's a question of receiving what God says rather than of clarity. Because Clearly He has declared that He Hates Divorce! Now how can that statement be in any way unclear? It's one of the clearest statements that can be made. Clearly He has declared that what has been joined together in Marriage before God, let no man pull it asunder! That is hardly ambiguous as some people attempt to make it out to be. Clearly He has declared that a woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive! Where is the ambiguity in that law? Clearly He has declared that if the wife departs or separates from her husband, she is to remain unmarried or seek to be reconciled to her husband! How anyone can see a lack of clarity in those statements can only be explained by "the will of man" to see what he wants to see. Of course it seems right in his own mind, but that's only because he doesn't want to be obedient to what counsel God gives.

Proverbs 12:15

If we study to show ourselves approved, and receive the love of truth in the "authority" of the word of God, then we will come to realize that the scriptures are "not" unclear on divorce, and it is men/women led by the flesh, that are in confusion. If we listen to scripture rather than our Pastors, popular authors, modern society, the WCF, and other extra-biblical sources, the biblical teaching on divorce and remarriage will be crystal clear. For we will have eyes to see and ears to hear. A Covenant marriage is an oath taken that the two are one flesh, and are bound by the law as long as they live.

Moreover, those Christians who feign the scriptures are unclear on divorce are actually implying that Christ taught in a way that was confusion. I again submit that it is not the scriptures that are confusing, but Man's heart that allows him to ignore certain absolutes (like "let not man put asunder,") and make claim that other scriptures make these laws that a spouse is bound as long as they live, worthless. Understand, the man of the flesh wants the passages to appear confusing so that he doesn't have to obey them. The key is Christians understanding that the heart of man is desperately wicked, so that the flesh is warring with the spirit.

Romans 7:23-25

For what is unclear about "Whosoever puts away his wife and marries another commits adultery, and whoever marries her that is put away commits adultery?" So you see, it is not the words of scriptures that are confusing people, it is the words of men "circumventing" those words of scripture that are confusing men.


nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Diane Moody on January 24, 2005, 03:26:30 AM
Kyle, it took me a long time to recognize that what Tony was saying about divorce was the truth, but finally you have to just answer the questions within yourself. God just doesn't want anyone to divorce and there isn't really scripture that allows it. It's a hard pill to swallow, I know, but swallow it we must if we are going to be obedient to the Lord.

 Luke 16:17-18 "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery."

God's law will not fail, we may not like it but we have to accept it and not private interpretations.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on January 28, 2005, 07:46:35 AM
>>>
Luke 16:17-18
"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery:

and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery."

God's law will not fail, we may not like it but we have to accept it and not private interpretations.
<<<

Bottom line, you are so correct. That is the failing of the modern Church. They have let their emotions, feelings and biases affect the way that they handle scripture. There is no doubt in my mind that many theologians approach scripture as, "How can I make these passages say what I want them to say," rather than approach scripture with the mind of Christ in declaring, "I will surrender to whatever the text actually says, regardless of if I like it or not."

Jeremiah 23:21-22

There are faithful prophets of God and unfaithful prophets of God preaching two distinct hermeneutics. And they are bringing men to two distinct conclusions regarding the keeping of God's laws. And the keeping of God's marriage Covenant or Promise. One receiving that it is a one-flesh indissoluble bond as God said, and the other denying God made such declarations and counseling that the Church not hear God's word concerning not pulling asunder what God has joined. Harsh evaluation? ...Yes, but true.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Chris on January 29, 2005, 09:01:27 AM
Quote
Adultery does not break a marriage, divorce breaks the marriage.

Hi Oneil,
You are correct in saying that adultery does not break the marriage but I believe you are wrong when you say that divorce does. Divorce doesn't break the marriage. If it did then why would it be adultery to remarry or marry one who has been divorced. It makes no sense

Steve

 Perhaps because God speaks of divorce as a real act. So there has to be the unlawful act of divorce. If God says you can't marry a divorced person, then God recognizes this person's divorce.

You are implying that there is no such thing as divorce. I believe there is divorce, but it is an unlawful act. I think that is what Christ taught.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 15, 2005, 05:23:59 PM
Hi Tony,

I was reading your Bible Studies section again.   We talked via email about this issue a long time ago, but I am wondering if after consideration of Dr. David Engelsma's writings,  you still hold the same position you did in this (your) study:

<<<<<<<As long as your spouse is still alive (married or unmarried), you may not remarry. For there is no divorce, and scripture is clear that there were multiple marriages recognized (not condoned) 'as legitimate marriages' in the Bible. Therefore, you cannot remarry while your husband or wife lives even though they be married to another. But if they are dead, the spouse is free to remarry.

If you yourself have remarried, you may not divorce, but honor your most recent vow. For it is a legal marriage. A divorce of the second partner would only compound an already sinful situation. We should stay with our spouse, but submit ourselves before God in mourning and repentance in recognition of this sin of remarriage. We must confess this sin in humility rather than justification of it with self serving rationalizations. When we approach God acknowledging our sins rather than excusing them, God is faithful to forgive us these sins, just as with any other sin. >>>>>

This stance sounds very much like Pastor John Piper's stance and leaves many questions unanswered----such as:  If there was no real divorce acknowledged by God, wouldn't the second marriage be not a true marriage, but an adulterous relationship?    Thank you.   Blessings in Jesus, Cindy

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 16, 2005, 07:17:52 AM
>>>
I've been reading posts on this forum off & on for several years, and this topic is easily the most maddening. From what I can see the whole idea of marrige comes from Genesis 2: 21 - 24.
<<<

Not True. If Genesis 2:21-24 was the whole of what the Lord told us concerning marriage and divorce, then we wouldn't even know what a marriage was, much less a divorce. So, as is usually the case with this "unpopular" issue, we have an over-simplification of it, that it might appear UNCLEAR.

Romans 7:2-3

I have yet to have anyone show me where that "law" God spoke of, was UNCLEAR. The truth is, all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and no doctrine is established upon a verse or two. Genesis 2 isn't the end-all regarding marriage. Such a hermeneutic would be folly! Christ demonstrated this principle when Satan quoted scripture implying Christ could throw himself off a mountain because the scripture said angels would bear him up. But the "truth" was that there were other scriptures that also had bearing on the scripture he quoted. And Christ replied that there was "MORE" written. Likewise, to break this issue down to Genesis 2:21-24 when God has so much to say on the issue cannot be righteously done. Everything the Bible has to say concerning marriage "and divorce" qualifies what Genesis chapter 2 means.

Malachi 2:16

Even God saying He hates divorce has significant bearing on what God says about marriage being a one flesh inseparable union. Because scripture is not understood in a vacuum. Scripture is qualified by scripture, but never contradicted.


Quote
>>>
It is not my point to agree or disagree with Mr. Warren's position. My point is to suggest that the issue is anything but CLEAR.
<<<

And if I may say so, "that" has been the battle cry of the devil on almost every doctrine that man doesn't want to hold. Any teaching that you can bring up, man will retort the same way so that absolutely nothing is clear that scripture teaches. Whether eunuchs are homosexuals is not clear, whether Arminianism is the gospel is unclear, the faith in Christ or the faith "of" Christ is unclear, whether we can have women pastors is unclear, Dispensationalism or Amillennialism is unclear, whether Jews are still the chosen people is unclear, when we should leave an abominable Church is unclear, can we divorce is unclear, etc., etc., ad nauseum. To listen to this worldly "mantra," we would think that the Bible is impossible for anyone to form doctrines with certainty, and that we should just "live and let live" just like the world does. But this is not true. God's laws against Divorce are NOT UNCLEAR. And they were understood to be wickedness and preached against almost "universally" by all Church groups up until about 60+ years ago. I consider it "laughable" the post-modern teaching that, all of a sudden, the laws regarding marriage and Divorce have become "unclear." Marriage is not unclear, the only thing that has changed over time is our culture, and thus the Churches tolerance for sin.


Quote
>>>
It would appear that the above verse must be taken allegorically. I say this because a physical marrige consists of two people and no matter how close they become or how well they know each other they are and always will be TWO people, or two flesh.
<<<

You say that as if it's a revelation. Of course they are two people. Everyone on earth knows that. The "point" (which you seem desperately trying to miss) that Christ is making is that in a marriage Covenant, the two are to be treated as if they are one. i.e., they are to be looked upon as inseparable, just "as if" they were both one single flesh. How can anyone honestly miss that most OBVIOUS point that Christ is making except they are predisposed to miss it? There is no way to rationally miss His point. And in truth "EVEN" the hardened-hearted Pharisees "GOT" His point. Selah!

Matthew 19:4-7

Even the hard-hearted Pharisees "GOT" the point Christ was making. Unlike the dishonest Christians today, they understood perfectly that Christ was saying that this reference to one flesh illustrated a binding relationship between a Man and Woman in marriage that they could not divorce (be separated). So that is why they followed up by asking, "Well why Did Moses say that we could Divorce then?"

Where is the Mystery?

Where is the lack of clarity? Where is the confusion? Yet many people today choose to "feign" ignorance of what is being said, even though the language is perfectly "CLEAR!" Christ says they are not to divorce, because they are one flesh inseperable, and they counter, Moses gave us a law of divorcement, why?"


Quote
>>>
In must cases, as in this case, people try to force a literal interpretation when they can't see the spiritual truth.  People have been digging with that shovel for thousands of years, and very little if anything of value has been uncovered, unless a better tool is used you'll only discover the little bit under the surface.
<<<

Well, actually I don't know anyone who tries to force the phrase "one flesh" is to be understood literally. NO ONE! And probably neither do you, I would guess. I believe that everyone knows what Christ means in saying marriage makes two people no more two, but one flesh. "EVEN" those who say they don't know what it means. Except they be blinded, they know what it means. I mean, it's not rocket science that it means they are inseparable. ..as in, you cannot have one person and make them two.

Where's the mystery?

The only lack of clarity is in the eyes of those who don't want to be obedient to what Christ actually said.

Romans 6:16


Quote
>>>
I would suggest that the book is much, much deeper than any of us know. And therefore, more often than not, UNCLEAR.
<<<

That the Bible is deep no one argues, but that it is so UNCLEAR that we can't tell if we should divorce is spurious. It's one of the worst statements by a Christian I think I have ever heard. It's something I would expect an unbeliever to say, not a Christian. It is simply untrue that the Bible is more often than not, unclear. What is true is that, more often than not, the people of the world don't like what the Bible has to say, and so mock it with platitudes and trite remarks about no one being able to understand doctrines. Doctrines such as those concerning marriage and divorce, because it is deemed so UNCLEAR. But the doctrines of the Church are its foundation, and when modern man chips away at that foundation, its fall is not far off.

2nd John 1:8-11


Quote
>>>
There is another spiritual principle, which is, in my opinion,  more clear. That principle goes something like this;Judge not, that you be not judged.
<<<

The text is sound, but today's interpretation of it is flawed. In other words, the, "Hear no evil, See no evil, Speak no evil" post-modern Politically Correct philosophy that has already almost brought the Church to the brink of desolation or ruin? No thanks! There are enough flowery theologians preaching the lukewarm gospel already, and I want no part of that. For you do err greatly, because "Judge Not" does not mean defer to preach, rebuke error, exhort to obedience, instruct in sound hermeneutics, or reprove false teachings. "Judge Not" is the typical misuse of scripture in labeling exhorting to obedience a form of legalism or judging unrighteously. Next you'll be telling me I don't have a kind spirit, I'm mean, uncharitable and unloving. Heard it all before, and am not impressed. It has nothing to do with declaring divorce to be unbiblical and against God's laws. Exhorting to obedience is not legalism and has nothing to do with "Judge Not lest ye be Judged."

http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/faq/what_is_legalism.shtml

So what then shall we say to everyone that walks after the imagination of their own heart? That no evil will come upon them? Or maybe we should just shut up about divorce all together like "MOST" of the Churches have already done? What shall we say then in lieu of preaching the truth concerning marriage and the hatred of God for divorce? Shall we click our heals three times, say God loves you everyone, or declare there is Peace, when there is no peace? No, serving appeasement pie is not what the saints are sent to do, so as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

Jeremiah 23:16-17

I will not say that Christians can be disobedient, can divorce and remarry, and no evil will come upon them.


Quote
>>>
It is my position, that you help nobody by being so steadfast in your position, and actually cause some people alot of unneccassry anguish.
<<<

And it is my position that we help nobody by not being steadfast in our Christian doctrines.

Hebrews 10:23
2nd Timothy 1:13-14

You say no one is helped by our being steadfast (gasp), but do you know that steadfast means "faithful?" By being steadfast in our positions, we hold fast the profession of our faith. But by being UNCLEAR, neither hot nor cold but lukewarm, we aren't even coming with the word of God anymore. And if we don't come steadfast with God's word, God will vomit us out of His mouth. We are "SENT" as prophets (mouth-pieces), messengers of the word of God. And when we take the "attitude" of lukewarmness that you demonstrate here today, we are not bringing God's word steadfastly. It is no longer God's word, at God's mouth. Bringing the sword of the spirit is a requirement, not an auxiliary weapon of warfare.

Revelation 3:15-17

Many a Christian comes with this lukewarm gospel, "thinking" that he is blessed with the riches of Christ, and yet he is in Christian poverty, spiritually blind, and without Christ's righteouness covering his sins. Because a tree is known by it's fruits, and those fruits are not his going about his business eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, as if all is well in the world. It's not in going around saying, "Peace, Peace, God loves you, and the Bible is unclear about doctrines more often than not." That is totally unacceptable to God. One thing we cannot get away from no matter how hard we try, is that "The Bible is an Offense" to everyone not blessed by the Lord, and there is nothing we can do about it. He who hath an ear, let him hear. Bring the gospel truth steadfastly.

Matthew 11:6

 
Quote
>>>
One other spiritual principle that might just be the best answer to this problem, and many others, is: Treat others the way you'd like to be treated.
<<<

Isaiah 58:6-7

I agree, I treat others the way I'd like to be treated. And how I'd like to be treated is to have the gospel truth be delivered to me honestly, unadulterated, not watered down, not lukewarm, but hot and cold as God inspired it. Let it prick my heart as it did those of old who were pierced and "recognized" their transgressions. I would like my neighbor to love me as he loves himself, desiring for me the same as he desires for himself. And how I wouldn't like to be treated is for someone to tell me that I couldn't tell black from white, or that everything was all right so long as I don't reprove, or that I will have peace when scripture says I won't, or imply that it doesn't really matter if I believe certain doctrines about divorce because most of scripture concerning it was UNCLEAR. No, I wouldn't want that. I wouldn't want anyone feeding me lines about God's teaching on marriage being unclear. The marriage doctrine that one flesh means inseparable has "generally" been adhered to for around 2,000 years, and is only now somehow "mysteriously" unclear? So unclear that 50 percent of Christian marriages now end in divorce? No, the only thing that has changed over the last 60 years is the level of rebellion in the heart of lawless man, in the Church.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 16, 2005, 07:30:09 AM
>>>
As long as your spouse is still alive (married or unmarried), you may not remarry. For there is no divorce..
And if you yourself have remarried, you may not divorce, but honor your most recent vow. For it is a legal marriage

This stance sounds very much like Pastor John Piper's stance and leaves many questions unanswered----such as:  If there was no real divorce acknowledged by God, wouldn't the second marriage be not a true marriage, but an adulterous relationship?    Thank you.   Blessings in Jesus, Cindy
<<<

No, for several reasons. One, divorce "is" acknowledged, called sin, and we are warned not to remarry if there is a divorce.

Matthew 5:32
Luke 16:18

Christ Himself speaks of those that are divorced, and both acknowledges the sin of divorce, and condemns anyone who would marry her that is divorced. He also acknowledges that someone who "Marries" a Divorced person is by doing so committing adultery. So by forbidding us to marry the divorced, and acknowledging that some do marry the divorced, He acknowledges that there is divorce, but that it is the sin that causes adultery. Otherwise there would be no reason for us being forbidden to marry them. So God is saying don't marry a divorced woman because you are sinning by adulterating the marriage covenant she has with her husband. Yet if you should already be married to a divorced person, you also cannot divorce her, because you would be causing her to adulterate the marriage.  In other words, divorce is strictly forbidden for every/any reason. Whether you are married or not married and seek to marry someone who is married.

And number two, a Marriage covenant is a marriage Covenant no matter if it is made with one person, two or three. As I said, and I think scripture bears this out conclusively, there were righteous people of scripture who took multiple wives. And all of the wives were recognized by God as marriages, though the actions not condoned. This proves that the second or third wife was "no less a wife" than the first, as some suppose. Therefore, they cannot be divorced.

1st Samuel 25:42-43

Selah! Therefore we cannot in any way conclude that a second wife is not really a wife or that it's just adultery. Surely marrying multiple wives is not what God planed for man "from the beginning," but once married, they all nevertheless become legitimate spouses.

1st Kings 11:3

God doesn't say King Solomon had one wife and six hundred and ninety-nine fornicating adulterous women. God says he had seven hundred Wives. Just as Jabob was married to Leah, and afterward he married Rachel, and "BOTH" became his legitimate wives. i.e., the second was not made illegitimate by his previous marriage to Leah. Biblically speaking, the idea that a first marriage invalidates all others that follow, is foreign to the Bible. Because a marriage Covenant is a promise or a "Oath" before God. That is precisely what the word Covenant means. Oath or Promise.

Numbers 30:2

What God hath joined together, let not man pull asunder. And a marriage Covenant or vow before God, is a binding oath. They are bound by the law as long as they live. So when you say "if" no divorce was acknowledged by God that would void the second marriage and make it merely adultery, that is not the case. For even "if" there was no divorce, the second marriage covenant promise is still a legitimate marriage contract. As is demonstrated throughout the scriptures. There is no way around it. And breaking the second marriage would be just as sinful as breaking the first. Perhaps more because it compounds the sin, doubling the transgression.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Bradley on February 16, 2005, 09:32:38 AM
>>>In must cases, as in this case, people try to force a literal interpretation when they can't see the spirtual truth. People have been digging with that shovel for thousands of years, and very little if anything of value has been uncovered, unless a better tool is used you'll only discover the little bit under the surface. I would suggest that the book is much, much deeper than any of us know. And therefore, more often than not, UNCLEAR.<<<

The spiritual truth is that marriage represents the union between Christ and his Chrurch.

Ephesians 5:30-32
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

This is the principle of faithfulness.  Christ would never leave nor forsake his bride, and as followers of Christ we should demonstate the same faithfulness.

Hebrews 14:4-5
4 Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
5 [Let your] conversation [be] without covetousness; [and be] content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

Bradley
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Bunyan on February 16, 2005, 12:21:34 PM
>>>In must cases, as in this case, people try to force a literal interpretation when they can't see the spirtual truth. People have been digging with that shovel for thousands of years, and very little if anything of value has been uncovered, unless a better tool is used you'll only discover the little bit under the surface. I would suggest that the book is much, much deeper than any of us know. And therefore, more often than not, UNCLEAR.<<<

The spiritual truth is that marriage represents the union between Christ and his Chrurch.

This is the principle of faithfulness.  Christ would never leave nor forsake his bride, and as followers of Christ we should demonstrate the same faithfulness.



Tony, Bradley,
    It's so refreshing when someone actually stands up to be counted, and says the things that we would like to say if we were a little more courageous or outgoing. It's wonderful that we have a place where the truth can be said without everyone jumping on you for being judgmental and telling us what the authors of today think. I love the fact that the bible is used as the proving ground. It's so rare.

 Isaiah 28:13, 14
  "But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem."




Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 16, 2005, 01:18:44 PM
>>>

No, for several reasons. One, divorce "is" acknowledged.

[Christ Himself speaks of those that are divorced, and both acknowledges the divorce, and condemns anyone who would marry her that is divorced. He also acknowledges that someone who "Marries" a Divorced person is by doing so committing adultery. So by forbidding us to marry the divorced, and acknowledging that some do marry the divorced, He acknowledges that there is divorce, but that it is the sin of adultery. Otherwise there would be no reason for us being forbidden to marry them. So God is saying don't marry a divorced woman because you are sinning by adulterating the marriage covenant she has with her husband. What God hath joined together, let not man pull asunder. And a marriage Covenant or vow before God, is a binding oath. They are bound by the law as long as they live. So when you say "if" no divorce was acknowledged by God that would void the second marriage and make it merely adultery, that is not the case. For even "if" there was no divorce, the second marriage covenant promise is still a legitimate marriage contract. As is demonstrated throughout the scriptures. There is no way around it. And breaking the second marriage would be just as sinful as breaking the first. Perhaps more because it compounds the sin, doubling the transgression.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

I am utterly confused with your stance Tony.  In the OT taking on multiple wives was NEVER called adultery, as Jesus labelled it in the NT teachings.  By definition adultery means having unlawful intercourse with someone who is not your spouse.  When someone "marries" another unlawfully, they are entering into unlawful relations with someone who is not their spouse.   It appears to me throughout NT teachings that a new "vow" does not negate the previous one-----the new "vow" is sin, not a lawful vow.   I just don't see how anyone can get around that. 

When Paul used marriage as an analogy to Christ and the law (Rom. 7:2-3), He gave the example of a woman who was remarried.   She was called an adulteress and would be such until her lawful husband died-----then and only then would she be free to remarry----because death and only death dissolves that bond.   Is it your belief that divorce dissolves the bond, or a new "vow" dissolves the previous one?

In another NT instance John called Herod's wife "Phillip's wife".   If she was now lawfully Herod's wife, why would John say such an inflammatory, incorrect statement?   In Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 16, 2005, 05:09:23 PM
>>>
I am utterly confused with your stance Tony.  In the OT taking on multiple wives was NEVER called adultery, as Jesus labelled it in the NT teachings.
<<<

Jesus didn't label taking on multiple wives in the New Testament adultery either. Nowhere did He say marrying two wives was adultery. Where do you read that? Multiple wive has "never" been considered adultery. Divorce, and then marrying another wife is adultery because it is unlawful to take another man's wife to wife. Or another woman's husband, as husband. Since there is no divorce!


Quote
>>>
By definition adultery means having unlawful intercourse with someone who is not your spouse.
<<<

No, I don't think that's exactly what you mean. Having unlawful intercourse with someone who is not your spouse is [pornea] (unlawful nudity and by extension sexual activity) or fornication. Adultery means having unlawful lust or sexual activity with "any married person." Be that married person ourselves with a single person, or us as single people with a married person. So that if a man is divorced, and he marries another, he is committing adultery or unlawful sexual union because God "forbids" divorce. i.e., he has adulterated his marriage. Likewise, if I am not married, and not divorced, and yet I marry someone who is divorced, I am adulterating that person's marriage. Yet if I repent of my sin of unlawful marriage, I am an adulterer but forgiven. But I cannot then "divorce" my second wife because that too would be violating the marriage covenant vow and sin against God again. Confusing? No, not when you simply understand the whole "POINT," which is that we cannot divorce, ever!!!!! God hates divorce or covenant breakers.

Malachi 2:14-16

Complicated? No, God hates putting away (Divorce), or those who break the marriage covenant or vow. We simply don't do it, whether we have married once, or twice, we keep the wife. We cannot lawfully divorce.


Quote
>>>
When someone "marries" another unlawfully, they are entering into unlawful relations with someone who is not their spouse.
<<<

That's impossible. They indeed are entering into an unlawful marriage, but clearly once vows are taken before God she is also his spouse and he cannot just violate her and then toss her aside as not being his wife. For then the last act would be worse than the first. Solomon had multiple wives.

You say marries another unlawfully "as if" a second marriage conceived in sin is not really a marriage. That's a untenable conclusion you've reached. I've already shown "by scripture" conclusively that this is not the case and multiple marriages were valid marriages even though "from the beginning" this is not what God wanted. But can you show me where God ever said a second wife is not really a wife? There is no such precept because it just doesn't exist. You seem to be talking about the second wife "as if" she's just a harlot that can be tossed aside like an old rag when that is just not Biblically justifiable. He cannot divorce his second wife "lawfully" anymore than he could the first. Yes, he can do it unlawfully, but that's what got him into the second marriage in the first place. When someone marries another unlawfully, they are still bound by that marriage vow they took before God. The marriage vow or Covenant is inseparable. It is an unbreakable binding in the sight of God, who hates divorce.


Quote
>>>
It appears to me throughout NT teachings that a new "vow" does not negate the previous one
<<<

Correct. The second vow is a second vow which must be kept on top of the first vow. And to be consistent, as the New vow doesn't negate the old vow, the old vow cannot negate the new vow. Thus the man has two wives, one of which he has unlawfully divorced, and the other by whom he has unlawfully adulterated the first marriage.


Quote
>>>
the new "vow" is sin, not a lawful vow.   I just don't see how anyone can get around that.  
<<<

I agree the second vow was made in sin, but that does not invalidate it. Where do you read that sin invalidates our actions? i.e., if I get a loan and buy a Ferrari automobile to impress my friends, vowing that I will pay it back, that is a vow made in sin. Absolutely an unlawful action on my part. Yet that doesn't then mean that since it was unlawful, I can rip up the contract and forebear to keep my vow. Talk about getting around vows, we cannot get around any vow made before the Lord in marriage. Lawful or unlawful, it is a vow and there cannot be divorce from it. That's the whole Point of Christ saying in Matthew 19 that "what God hath joined together." In other words, marriage is a VOW TAKEN BEFORE GOD. It cannot be pulled asunder. You can't get out of that vow.

Numbers 30:2

God hates Covenant breakers as much as He hates divorce, because it is one and the same act.


Quote
>>>
When Paul used marriage as an analogy to Christ and the law (Rom. 7:2-3), He gave the example of a woman who was remarried.   She was called an adulteress and would be such until her lawful husband died.
<<<

That's not what it said, the last part is misquoted. It says she shall be called an adulteress, as indeed she was. It says nothing about her remaining an adulteress until her husband dies. Rather it is explaining how she "is" an adulteress if she marries someone while her husband is still alive. You are reading too much into the text.

Romans 7:2

It's merely saying a woman cannot divorce as long as her husband is alive, or she is an adulterer. Which I also say. It doesn't say if she divorces, she's not really divorced, or that if she remarries while her husband is alive, she is to divorce the second man. So we cannot add these things as if it is the word of God. We cannot read these ideas into the text.

But as I've said, I've heard every imaginable way that people use to "get around" the marriage Covenant, but none where they have scripture where God ever says any divorced person can remarry lawfully, or that any person married a second time can then divorce lawfully. There are no such scriptures. No, scripture declares any divorce is acceptable, period.

Rather than use this passage as an avenue for escape from marriage, it is God illustrating here that as death sets free the husband and wife from the law which bound them to each other, so that the surviving spouse can marry another, likewise the death of Christ brought death to the law (the covenant of works) that held us "in bonds" to the curse of it. i.e., death of a married spouse is the only thing that separates them from being bound together by law. Likewise, Christ's death is the "ONLY THING" that could set us free from marriage to the law.

A woman is an adulteress because she has broken the law and married another, just as the woman at the well. Christ didn't say go back to your first husband because all the others weren't your husbands, He said "you have had five husbands" and the man you are living with now is not your husband. What he told her was "go and sin no more," illustrating her sins were forgiven.  


Quote
>>>
then and only then would she be free to remarry----because death and only death dissolves that bond.
<<<

Yes, only death dissolves the bond of marriage, meaning her second marriage cannot be dissolved anymore than the first. At Best she has two husbands (as Christ said that the woman had 5). But she cannot go back to the first, for that is confusion, and she cannot divorce the second.


Quote
>>>
Is it your belief that divorce dissolves the bond, or a new "vow" dissolves the previous one?
<<<

No, as I've said again and again, it is my belief that nothing dissolves the marriage bond. That's the whole "POINT" of everything that I've been saying here. That's the whole point of Christ using the "one flesh" analogy. That's the whole point of God saying "what He has joined together, let not man pull asunder." That's the whole point of Paul saying a married couple are bound by the law so long as they live. The point is that they are "inseparable" and that we should never divorce. First wife, second wife, third wife, makes no difference! My stance has been consistent throughout. A marriage vow cannot be broken lawfully. If we divorce, then we must remain unmarried, or be reconciled to our spouse. If we remarry, we cannot divorce that second wife lawfully anymore than we could divorce the first. No one can accuse me of ever condoning Divorce for any reason, for anybody. It's my consistent stand that all divorce is unlawful. and really, there's nothing "inconsistent" about that.

On the other hand, you (correct me if I'm wrong) insist that a marriage vow cannot be broken by divorce, except if it's a second wife? Well then a marriage vow can be broken, can it not? Or that a divorce of the first wife is invalid, even though Christ speaks of divorced wives and says that we should not marry them? I just don't find consistency in that from scripture, and I've shown countless times that husbands take multiple wives and they are still wives.

John 4:17-18

Unless we assume her five husbands were all dead. which would be confusion since she was reported caught in adultery, and yet she said "I have no Husband." It is more likely she went from husband to husband, and her current was a live-in boyfriend. The point being, this was a loose woman who had more than one husband "implying" that she went from man to man. God doesn't tell her to divorce them, or go back to the first, rather to go and sin no more. God meets us right where we are.


Quote
>>>
In another NT instance John called Herod's wife "Phillip's wife".   If she was now lawfully Herod's wife, why would John say such an inflammatory, incorrect statement?   In Him, Cindy
<<<

Mark 6:17-18

Because God's law forbids anyone from marrying his brother's wife unless the brother is dead. And the law not only did not forbid it if he "was" dead, but often suggested it be done. So John is speaking out against unlawful marriage, just as I am. He's a faithful witness of what is lawful and what is not. ..you know, what some people call judging.

Second, this is the Old testament side of the cross where "putting away" was allowed for the hardness of their heart. There is no mystery there, even Joseph thought about putting Mary away when he found she was with child. So you're mixing apples and oranges with this one. This has no correlation to a second wife not being a real wife.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 16, 2005, 09:33:50 PM
>>>
I am utterly confused with your stance Tony.  In the OT taking on multiple wives was NEVER called adultery, as Jesus labelled it in the NT teachings.
<<<

Jesus didn't label taking on multiple wives adultery either. Nowhere did He say marrying two wives was adultery. Where do you read that? Multiple wive has "never" been considered adultery. Divorce, and then marrying another wife is adultery because it is unlawful.
Quote
>>>
By definition adultery means having unlawful intercourse with someone who is not your spouse.
<<<

Likewise, if I am not married, and not divorced, and yet I marry someone who is divorced, I am adulterating that person's marriage. Yet if I repent of my sin of unlawful marriage, I am an adulterer but forgiven. But I cannot then "divorce" my second wife because that too would be violating the marriage covenant vow and sin against God again. Confusing? No, not when you simply understand the whole "POINT," which is that we cannot divorce, ever!!!!! God hates divorce or covenant breakers.

Malachi 2:14-16
  • "Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.
    • And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.
    • For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously[/i]."
    Complicated? No, God hates putting away (Divorce), or those who break the marriage covenant or vows. We simply don't do it, whether we have married once, or twice, we keep the wife.


    They indeed are entering into an unlawful marriage, but clearly once vows are taken before God she is also his spouse and he cannot just violate her and then toss her aside as not being his wife. For then the last act would be worse than the first.

    You say marries another unlawfully, "as if" a second marriage conceived in sin is not really a marriage. That's a untenable conclusion you've reached. I've already shown "by scripture" conclusively that this is not the case and multiple marriages were valid marriages even though "from the beginning" this is not what God wanted. But can you show me where God ever said a second wife is not really a wife? There is no such precept, it just doesn't exist. You seem to be talking about the second wife "as if" she's just a harlot that can be tossed aside like an old rag when that is just not Biblically justifiable. He cannot divorce his second wife "lawfully" anymore than he could the first.

    Correct. The second vow is a second vow which must be kept on top of the first vow. And to be consistent, as the New vow doesn't negate the old vow, the old vow cannot negate the new vow. Thus the man has two wives, one of which he has unlawfully divorced, and the other by whom he has unlawfully adulterated the first marriage.
Tony, I still don't understand your teaching.   That seems more like confusion to me.   It seems you are saying all marriages are still in tact----the first ones and each one after.   Do you mean that a divorced woman who remarries now has 2 husbands she is "joined" with?   I just don't see that as biblically based.   

You say vows are binding, how so?   If one makes a vow which is a sinful vow, they can't back out of it---making restitution where necessary?    If I vow to rob a bank with another, am sitting in the get away car and change my mind BEFORE the person comes out of the bank, leaving them to face the crime alone, am I guilty before God for forsaking my vow to the other person?   I was committing sin in the vow made.   The same holds true for a second adulterous marriage.   Nowhere can we find that such a marriage is ever considered legitimate---to the contrary---they are labelled by the Lord as adultery.   In Mk. 10:11 Jesus even states that if a man divorces his wife and marries another he commits adultery AGAINST her.   Why?  Because in the Lord's eyes, He is still married to His first wife and now he is involved in an illicit relationship with a new woman.   

In the OT we see where marriages which were contracted in opposition to the commands of the Lord were forsaken-----the men PUT AWAY their wives----and they did NOT sin doing so (Ezra 9-10).   It is quite obvious that these men who had forsaken the Lord's commands concerning marriage, by putting away their wives were repenting for their disobedience.   In the case of Mal. 2:14-16 we see that Malachi calls the previous wife----the wife of thy covenant and further, "yet she IS thy companion" present tense..........it doesn't appear the second wife is a wife of covenant.  It actually appears that God's judgment is upon the guilty man----even rejecting his offerings in tears.

The scriptures you give are OT scriptures which involve polygamy, not adultery.   That is not apples to apples.  One is not labelled a "sin", the other type is.   You say one can repent of this adultery (remarriage) and stay in the "marriage"?   Can that type of repentance be practiced with other types of adultery?   Confession and then continue in the sin?    If God still views one being "joined" to the first spouse-----the original marriage partner---- how is it God then "joins" others to that union which will not be dissolved til death-----even calling the new unions, adultery, yet He joins them anyways?   Is God obligated by our sinful vows to join that which He forbids and calls sin?

It is confusion in my opinion to say one form of adultery is ok with God, yet the other types are not and one type of adulterer will have their part in the lake of fire while the other type can say "sorry" and continue on in their adultery.

My viewpoint has nothing to do with treating 2nd wives/husbands as "rags" to be thrown away.  That was quite an unnecessary statement.   I am but one of many who believe in the permanency of marriage in the reformed camp----one who believes that scripturally, there is absolutely no evidence that God joins second adulterous unions(remarriages contracted while 1st spouses are still living).   There are many writers on your website (Engelsma, Keys, Hoeksma, etc) who hold the very same position I do.

Finally, I do not understand your take of Rom. 7:2-3.  Every translation I have looked at basically gives the same rendering:   If a woman remarries WHILE HER HUSBAND IS ALIVE, she shall be called an adulteress.   There is no indication that after the initial "act" is accomplished---the remarriage---she will no longer be called an adulteress.  Paul was showing that NOTHING will break the original marriage bond----only death.    The remarriage is adultery.   The text does not say she will be an adulteress if she divorces as you say, it says she will be an adulteress if she REMARRIES while her husband is alive.  One cannot commit adultery if they only divorce, but do not enter into an illicit relationship-----if they remain as Paul stated in I Cor. 7:10.    Blessings in Jesus, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: GoldRush on February 16, 2005, 11:24:33 PM
Cindy,

You confuse the reality and fact of marriage, with the sad description of many of those marriages.

Adultery is only a description of unfaithful and defiled; albeit, legal marriages.

Marriage is not sin; befouling the union of marriage (through any form of unfaithfulness) is the sin.

J&R




Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 17, 2005, 12:08:06 AM
Adultery is only a description of unfaithful and defiled; albeit, legal marriages.

Marriage is not sin; befouling the union of marriage (through any form of unfaithfulness) is the sin.

Hello J&R,

You believe the original marriages that God joined(Mt. 19:9, 5:32, Mk. 10:11-12, Lk. 16:18, Rom. 7:2-3) are dissolved through a new "marriage" which Jesus terms adultery?  In Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: GoldRush on February 17, 2005, 12:47:40 AM
Hello J&R,

You believe the original marriages that God joined(Mt. 19:9, 5:32, Mk. 10:11-12, Lk. 16:18, Rom. 7:2-3) are dissolved through a new "marriage" which Jesus terms adultery?  In Him, Cindy

No.

Original marriage contracts are not "dissolved" by additional marriages, nor do they become legally invalid because of unfaithful hearts and/or adulterous actions.

  The only way a consummated marriage covenant ceases to be legally valid, is by the death of one or both of the parties.

(Jesus never called additional marriages "adultery."  Marriage is a permanent contractual term.  "Adultery" is the moral violation and befoulment of said contracts.)


J&R



Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 17, 2005, 07:22:49 AM
>>>
Tony, I still don't understand your teaching.
<<<

Why is that? Especially when it's so simple. I can break it down to you in four words. "Do Not Divorce, Ever!" Everything is subject to that rule. Simply put, it is unlawful to divorce. It is unlawful to remarry after a divorce. And it is unlawful to divorce again after you have previously divorced and been remarried. Do you understand my position now? Because it's really not that complicated. "Don't divorce your first wife and don't divorce your second wife, and don't divorce any other wife." You can say you don't understand it, but what's not to understand? One should not divorce any wife that they have made a marriage Covenant with, and if they marry a divorced person, then by definition they commit adultery


Colossians 3:19

Love them as Christ loves the Church. Unconditionally.


Quote
>>>
That seems more like confusion to me.   It seems you are saying all marriages are still in tact----the first ones and each one after.
<<<

Come on, you're talking in circles. How could I "seem" to be saying that when I've said Christ recognized divorce. Did He not say don't marry the Divorced? I've already explained to you that all Divorce is unlawful. And this includes Divorce of the first wife, Divorce of a second wife, and Divorce of any other wife. And I've already explained to you that though divorce is unlawful, there are those who will divorce anyway and who will remarry against the law of God. But that doesn't make the marriage vows taken with another wife invalid. As I've said, two wives are unlawful, but the scripture teaches that the first wife doesn't invalidate the second. It's very simple. I've explained it in this one tiny paragraph, yet you are saying I "seems" to be saying something else so you can continue in your circular reasoning. Let me try again. I'm not saying that all marriages are still intact, I've already said that someone divorced "unlawfully" had divorced. Yet each time you write back "as if" I've said there is no Divorce and they are still married. If there was no such thing as Divorce, God would not say that He hates Divorce, would He? I use the examples of multiple marriages only in retort to your implication that the second wife cannot be his wife because he married another first. Obviously, that theory is flawed considering scripture where man has multiple wives.


Quote
>>>
Do you mean that a divorced woman who remarries now has 2 husbands she is "joined" with?  
<<<

Obviously she is not joined "literally" with anyone. The one flesh "principle" is to denote that the marriage bond is to be looked upon as inseparable. Just as obviously, people today don't look at the marriage covenant that way, as a "till the death " bond.

A divorced woman who remarries, had a husband whom she has divorced and cannot return to, and she has a husband whom she is currently married to, and cannot Divorce. That is concise and thorough and I hope that is clear now. But somehow I think you will still "believe" it unclear. There is nothing I can do about that.


Quote
>>>
You say vows are binding, how so?  If one makes a vow which is a sinful vow, they can't back out of it..
<<<

You are mixing apples and oranges. A marriage vow is not a vow to go strangle my doctor, it is a binding covenant or contract between a man and woman before God. It's not like I take a vow to find a friend and rob a store. But hypothetically speaking, if I did take such a vow, I would have the choice of either repenting beforehand and not going through with it. Or of doing it, repenting later, but "STILL" having to suffer the consequences of that act. i.e., I cannot say, I repented now so I can go back home without being changed with the Robbery. Likewise, if someone Divorces and remarries, and they later repent, they are forgiven, but they "STILL" have to suffer the consequences of their action of becoming married to another. A divorce is unlawful, a remarriage is also unlawful, but a second Divorce is also unlawful.

As the scripture I already gave clearly showed, God takes a vow as a serious thing that should not be broken. I don't know how many times I have to quote God saying He Hates Divorce (Covenant Vow Breaking) before we finally get the picture. That doesn't just mean divorce of the first wife, but divorce of a second wife, or of a third wife. God hates it. It adulterates the marriage.

Matthew 5:28

Adultery of the first marriage by marrying another does not invalidate the second marriage as you erroneously imply. Christ taught that the definition of adultery was as simply as a lustful thought in the mind. So you cannot Biblically contend that adultery invalidates a second marriage. A second marriage is adulterous, yet it is a marriage.

Mark 10:12
Luke 16:18

Clearly there is a "marriage to another" even though God says that marriage is unlawful. Otherwise God wouldn't call it a marriage, He would say you are simply fornicating and should return to the "real" husband. But that is antithetical to what the whole of the scriptures teach. She "cannot" return to her previous husband, for God looks at that as an abomination/confusion.


Quote
>>>
In Mk. 10:11 Jesus even states that if a man divorces his wife and marries another he commits adultery AGAINST her.   Why?  Because in the Lord's eyes, He is still married to His first wife and now he is involved in an illicit relationship with a new woman.  
<<<

No, he's not still married, Christ said they are divorced.

Mark 10:12

Christ said (not Tony) that if a woman divorces her husband, she is committing adultery. You on the other hand contend that there is no divorce, even though Christ says there is. You contend that the divorced and remarried wife should go back to the first husband, which is again, antithetical to scripture and God's rules concerning abominable things. Even David could not go back to his wife when she was given in marriage to another man, because that would be confusion! When she became legitimately "MARRIED" to another man, she could not lawfully go back to her first husband. You cannot just completely ignore the scriptures on this matter, for there is a general principle at work here. And it's been at work long before David.

Deuteronomy 24:4

He may not "take her AGAIN to be his WIFE" after she has been divorced and has married and slept with another man. Such an act is an abomination to God! This wasn't adultery where the wife could return to her first husband, she could not return to him not only because he was no longer her husband "BEFORE GOD," but because such an action is confusion and an abomination. These are God's words, God's laws, not mine. Clearly even you can see here that though God hates Divorce, God also demonstrates that He recognized the Divorce of this woman, contrary to what you are implying. God hated Divorce, and yet there was Divorce.

Christ also Hates Divorce, and He clearly recognized Divorce by saying no one should marry a Divorced person. So are you arguing with Christ saying that He was wrong because there was never really a Divorce? Why then does He say we shouldn't marry the Divorced?  This is all true because Divorce and remarriage is unlawful and thus adulterates the first marriage. Not because a second marriage is not valid. Divorce of the second wife would compound the sin.


Quote
>>>
it doesn't appear the second wife is a wife of covenant.  It actually appears that God's judgment is upon the guilty man----even rejecting his offerings in tears.
<<<

Here you are simply rationalizing, which typically happens when there is inconsistency. Covenant simply means a promise, Oath or vow. When we wed, we enter into a marriage "Covenant" or vow. If He was wed to another, He had a marriage covenant or vow with her also. God in simply saying in these verses that the fault He has is that they broke the laws of the marriage covenant by divorce of the wife of his youth, and being united in another later marriage covenant before God. i.e., God hates Divorce. Can we do any less?


Quote
>>>
The scriptures you give are OT scriptures which involve polygamy, not adultery.
<<<

I didn't give the scriptures to support Polygamy as you well know. I gave them to show that "YOUR" idea that legally there is only legitimacy for the first wife, is fatally flawed. ..but you already knew that was why I gave them, correct?

Quote
>>>
Confession and then continue in the sin?
<<<

A marriage entered into unlawfully, and the unlawful marriage repented of, is not a continuation in sin. But a second Divorce would be! So this is a "Straw Man" argument. The greater sin would be to put-away or Divorce the second wife also, and try and return to the first (as you suggest people should). As scripture shows, this is confusion and an abomination to the Lord. If we confess our sins, right where we are, God is faithful to forgive us our sins.


Quote
>>>
 If God still views one being "joined" to the first spouse-----the original marriage partner---- how is it God then "joins" others to that union which will not be dissolved til death-
<<<

The same way the immutable God viewed it in the Old Testament when He declared that the divorced wife, who married again, could NOT return to the first husband. If your principle was God's principle, then why is God calling this an ABOMINABLE act? What do you think, God is playing word games here between the Old and New covenants? No, there is divorce, there is remarriage, and it is unlawful, but so is divorce that we may return to our previous spouses. Clearly, no matter how we rationalize it away, God has declared it an abomination to Him. And there is a reason for that.


Quote
>>>
It is confusion in my opinion to say one form of adultery is OK with God, yet the other types are not and one type of adulterer will have their part in the lake of fire while the other type can say "sorry" and continue on in their adultery.
<<<

These are more "Straw Men," since no one has said divorce is "OK" or that anyone can continue on in adultery. God gives three immutable rules.

1. All Divorce is unacceptable and unlawful. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.
2. All Remarriage (while a partner is still alive) is unacceptable and unlawful. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.
3. We cannot return to our first marriage after we have remarried, because it is unacceptable an an abomination before God. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.

It's not complicated (despite your belief), because it's three simple immutable rules upon which "ALL" questions of marriage and divorce stand.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 17, 2005, 09:18:04 AM
>>>
Tony, I still don't understand your teaching.
<<<

Why is that? Especially when it's so simple? I can break it down to you in four words. "Do Not Divorce, ever!" Everything is subject to that rule. It is unlawful to divorce, it is unlawful to remarry after a divorce, and it is unlawful to divorce after you have previously divorced and remarried. Do you understand my position now? Because it's really not that complicated. "Don't divorce your first wife and don't divorce your second wife, and don't divorce any other wife." You can say you don't understand it, but what's not to understand? One should not divorce any wife that they have.
These are more "Straw Men," since no one has said divorce is "OK" or that anyone can continue on in adultery. God gives three immutable rules.

1. All Divorce is unacceptable and unlawful. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.
2. All Remarriage (while a partner is still alive) is unacceptable and unlawful. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.
3. We cannot return to our first marriage after we have remarried, because it is unacceptable an an abomination before God. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.

It's not complicated (despite your belief), because it's three simple immutable rules upon which "ALL" questions of marriage and divorce stand.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Tony,

You didn't address the passage in Ezra nor what I said concerning Malachi.  The men in Ezra DID divorce, and it was NOT sin.   They were walking in repentance because they transgressed the Law of God in who they married.   God's judgment was upon them for this.   Same thing in Malachi.  Yes, God hates divorce, but if we want to get to the heart of the matter, God hates WHAT CAUSES divorce.   He divorced Israel for her continual unrepentant sin----did He sin?  No.  What God hates is TREACHEROUS divorce as we see in Malachi----when someone puts away their COVENANT spouse to take another.   Your point number 1 above does not align with scripture to the contrary.   We also see in the practices of the early church, they DID divorce spouses which were in UNREPENTANT adultery---just as the Lord did with Israel.   What they did not practice however, was remarriage because that would be sin as they were still "joined" to their divorced spouses.

You say above that all remarriage is unlawful while a spouse is alive, yet earlier in your post you say a woman is NOT joined to her previous husband---"she HAD a husband".   In I Cor. 7:10-11 we see that although Paul calls the woman "unmarried", there is still a bond to her husband and HE is the only one she can be married to.  We see this same bond to the original husband in the woman who remarries and is called an adulteress----as long as the original husband is alive.   The "bond"---what God joined, is not dissolved in spite of a remarriage.   I know you're irritated that I don't understand your answers, but still don't understand.   Does God join those who marry multiple times to ALL parties and is the bond still in tact with others in spite of remarriage?   Are these unions/marriage considered polygamous unions---men being joined with more than 1 woman, women being joined with more than 1 man----by God?   If this is not the case and the second, third, fourth, etc marriages are the only ones "joined" by God-----the previous ones dissolved, then marriage really is not permanent and death is NOT what dissolves a union as scripture teaches-----a "new" covenant replaces the old marriage covenant.   Which do you believe or neither?

You also say that confession makes the adultery a non sin---make the person a repentant adulterer.   Why is it that in the case of adultery (remarriage) the sin turns into a non sin through confession alone?   Does homosexuality work that way?   Can a homosexual confess his guilt, yet remain in the relationship that God has called sin?   I can see no scripture which shows what Jesus called adultery turns into a lawful marriage----joined by God.   If there were some scripture which showed such, this would not even be an issue for me.   It seems that you believe a vow is what makes a marriage a marriage honored by God.   I think we can agree that if homosexual marriages become "legal" in man's sight, it will still be sin to the Lord---and He certainly will not "join" that union-----though they may be civilly married.  I can't get beyond the fact that Jesus calls remarriage adultery against the original spouse.   How can adultery possibly be considered a lawful marriage which God joins?   Why would Paul teach the bond of marriage (the original one) is NOT broken by a sinful remarriage (Rom. 7:2-3)?   It seems to me with this one sin(remarriage/adultery) people try to establish different rules concerning repentance.   Even the men of Ezra knew they had transgressed against God-----so they put away these wives.   Forsaking the sinful relationship was true repentance as would be the case with those in extramarital affairs.   In Ezra, those who didn't repent, were cast away and their possessions confiscated.   Divorcing in this case, was what was required as repentance.  Again, these men did NOT sin in divorcing these women.

#3 above----never in the Deut. 24:1-4 passage do we see the woman guilty of adultery in the remarriage-----as is the case when divorce and remarriage occurs in the NT teachings.   As a matter of fact, in the wordage of the writ of divorcement, the woman was given permission to remarry without sin.   When we compare this passage with what Jesus and Paul both taught, we see very different things.   To remarry, is to sin.  In Deut. 24, if the second husband died, the first STILL couldn't have her----even though she is free to remarry, in the Lord.   Why is that?   Could it be because God was setting down a precedent for hardheartedness?   If you put away a wife for "defilement/something unclean", you will never be able to have her back again.   If the reason you put her away is defilement, how much more is she defiled after being married to another, yet a husband would want her back?    That type of behavior is an abomination to the sanctity of marriage.   In Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 18, 2005, 09:26:36 AM
>>>
Tony,
You didn't address the passage in Ezra nor what I said concerning Malachi.  The men in Ezra DID divorce, and it was NOT sin.
<<<

There's nothing to address. We "ALL" know Divorce was allowed in the Old Testament by the law of Moses. It's what Christ addressed in Matthew 19. was it not? So this is a non-issue. We both know the law of Moses allowed divorce. And Christ explained why and said that it was not to be so. Correct?


Quote
>>>
Yes, God hates divorce, but if we want to get to the heart of the matter, God hates WHAT CAUSES divorce.
<<<

You say a lot of things, but I never see any scripture. Children might cause a Divorce. Insensitivity might cause a Divorce. Vanity might cause a Divorce. Again, "WHERE" does God say that He hates "what causes" Divorce? My Bible says, "God hates Divorce!" So that's the one I'm going with until you show me different. That's the difference in what I say and what you say. I don't have to change God's word, or add additional words, or take away some words. It's simple, "God hates Divorce."


Quote
>>>
1. All Divorce is unacceptable and unlawful. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.
2. All Remarriage (while a partner is still alive) is unacceptable and unlawful. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.
3. We cannot return to our first marriage after we have remarried, because it is unacceptable an an abomination before God. Disregarding this law is lawlessness or disobedience.

It's not complicated (despite your belief), because it's three simple immutable rules upon which "ALL" questions of marriage and divorce stand.

Your point number 1 above does not align with scripture to the contrary.
<<<

(Point #1: All Divorce is unacceptable and unlawful). This is contrary to scripture? I don't think so. That may be your personal opinion, but it certainly is not based on a careful exegesis of scripture. Because God nowhere says He permits Divorce. I "assume" you must be referring to the oft-misinterpreted "fornication exception" of Matthew 19:9. In truth, understanding that passage to say people can divorce for fornication because of the law of Moses makes the whole context of Christ's words Totally Nonsensical.

i.e., (Matt. 19:3) The Pharisees come tempting Christ asking if it is lawful to divorce for any cause or reason. Jesus answers them with a metaphor delineating how marriage is to be understood as two people inseparable (matt. 19:4-6). They think they have him trapped in His words and retort, (Matt 19:7) well why then did the law of Moses say that we could divorce and put our wives away (for unlawful nakedness or fornication). And Christ responds that it was only because (Matt 19:8 ) of the hardness of their heart that Moses allowed divorce (for fornication or unlawful nakedness, Deu. 24:1), but that this was not what God intended from the beginning. So He has covered the law of divorce for fornication. So He ends by saying that if anyone Divorces for any reason besides (except) fornication, it is adultery also (Matt 19:9), and whoever marries one who is divorced commits adultery. Thus, He has covered all bases. There is "NO" cause/reason that anyone can Divorce, confirming His "One Flesh" non-separate Metaphor. His Disciples (not only the Pharisees) are then shocked and flabbergasted at Christ saying this. And they say, if this is so (Matt 19:10) it's better that a man not ever get married in the first place.

Now that, as hard as it may be to swallow by modern man/woman, is the "truth" of the passage, taken in context.


Quote
>>>
We also see in the practices of the early church, they DID divorce spouses which were in UNREPENTANT adultery..
<<<

If you mean the early Church as in Old Testament saints, we know Divorce was allowed. as I just explained, it was for the hardness of their heart. If you mean early Church as in secular history documenting the Church after Christ, it's inadmissible as "Biblical" justification for Divorce. You know that! So can I assume this means that you really have no Biblical justification for Divorce? You have no scripture that will say we can Divorce? None at all? You have no quote of Christ saying the Divorced were never really Divorced, or saying the remarried are not really remarried? No such verses exist at all, do they? And indeed, how could they exist when Christ Himself clearly tells us not to marry "A Divorced" person. And clearly a person can be Divorced unlawfully. And Christ is not the author of confusion.


Quote
>>>
You say above that all remarriage is unlawful while a spouse is alive, yet earlier in your post you say a woman is NOT joined to her previous husband---"she HAD a husband".
<<<

Round and round and round we go, and where you stop, nobody knows. ;)

No, I say what the Bible says. That a woman cannot go back to her previous husband after she has remarried another man, because it is confusion. That's what God says. So clearly God recognizes the woman's marriage a second time, even in sin. It is a marriage! Once again, you are talking "AS IF" when someone marries, they are "literally" sewed together and cannot be separated. Not so. Christ uses the figure of the "one Flesh" principle to illustrate that Divorce is not ever permissible. Not to illustrate that they are literally sewed together and it's impossible to separate them. It is a token that they should not be pulled apart, not that they cannot be pulled apart. Obviously they can be, in disobedience to God's law that they shouldn't.

Matthew 19:6

That's why Christ says what God has joined together "LET NOT MAN PUT ASUNDER." Obviously then, man can pull it asunder, and Christ is commanding him "not to do it."

You are trying to prove something without use of scriptures, but just with smoke and mirrors, but it cannot be done. A woman who had "had" a previous husband, but is married to a current husband, has pulled apart what God has joined together by covenant marriage. She is not justified in doing it again for the second husband anymore than she was justified in doing it the first time.


Quote
>>>
In I Cor. 7:10-11 we see that ****although**** Paul calls the woman "unmarried", there is still a bond to her husband and HE is the only one she can be married to.
<<<

You say "although" as if it was insignificant that "GOD" (not Paul) says that the woman who has Divorced was "un-married." Clearly, this is a self-serving action on your part. Divorce is pulling asunder what God hath joined. Or as God calls it, putting away. A separation of what should have never been separated. Nevertheless, every word of God is divinely inspired, and God says this woman who divorced was then UNMARRIED! So try as you may to get around this truth by saying "although," the Biblical facts speak for themselves.

1st Corinthians 7:10

So, she is not to re-marry. She is either to stay single or return to her husband. Except if she has remarried, when she cannot return because God says that would be an confusion. i.e., you cannot go back and forth between men. You say that there is still a bond to her husband, obviously not, since Paul says she was "SEPARATED" and also says that she was "UNMARRIED." The Greek word married is [gameo]. The word for unmarried is [a'gameo], literally a negation of marriage, as NOT-married. And that is the word that is used here by inspiration of God. Not-Married! So unambiguously, while you make the claim the woman is still joined to the Husband, God uses the Greek word [chorizo],  separated, not joined. And by the way, in case you were not aware of it, that this is the exact same word [chorizo] that is used in Matthew 19 when Christ said "let not man [chorizo], or pull apart" ( separate) what God has joined together. So you are making my point for me, rather than strengthening your argument. Truth is like that. It seeks it's own level.

While it "is" true that if she doesn't remarry, her former husband is the only one that she can be married again to, but this hearkens back to what I have been continually telling you about God's law of a polluted land. Namely, that she can return to Him "ONLY" if she remains unmarried (just as Corinthians says). But if she was to remarry, then despite your protests, it is an abomination to God for her to return to the previous husband. Really, you're making "my point" for me. God is unchanging, He is immutable, and though you may not understand it, His laws against returning to a previous spouse after remarriage was not done away with. This woman has "ONLY" two options. Stay single, or return to her husband. Which has been my consistent stand about this from the start. If remarried, she cannot return to her husband, as you believe she should. ...and it's CLEAR.


Quote
>>>
The "bond"---what God joined, is not dissolved in spite of a remarriage.
<<<

Clearly, the "separation" Paul (Not Tony) under inspiration of God speaks about had pulled apart [chorizo] what God had joined together. i.e., she did what Christ (Matthew 19) exhorted us not to do. Put asunder what God had joined together. But what you are exhorting her to do (return to her first husband) is an abomination to God if she has remarried, as testified in Deuteronomy. But it's also further illustrated in Jeremiah.

Jeremiah 3:1

No, she shall not return to the first husband, because it is an abomination to God. You cannot just ignore this Biblical principle just because it doesn't "agree" with your belief that a wife should return to her first husband.


Quote
>>>
 I know you're irritated that I don't understand your answers, but still don't understand.
<<<

I'm not irritated at all. I know perfectly well why you say you don't understand my answers. No one (NO ONE) changes from their beliefs easily, especially when they have worked themselves to "believe" that they are sound. Nevertheless, we must reconcile our beliefs with "ALL" of scripture, not just a few pet verses. And we must have the Biblical justification. I haven't seen any. I've heard logic, and I've heard reasoning, I've heard common sense answers, and I've even heard rationalizations, but I've not heard scripture saying these things. I haven't heard God say anyone can divorce in the New Testament, anyone can remarry after Divorce or that anyone was not Divorced or separated once the got Divorced or separated. On the contrary, I've demonstrated time and again, the witness of scripture that these "WERE" put away or Divorced. You yourself even admit that Paul in Corinthians, under inspiration of God, said the woman was separated (same word Christ used in forbidding it in Matthew 19), and scripture said she was Not Married and should remain Not Married or return to her Husband. Though you still attempt to deny a separation, without actually denying it. But the "text" of Corinthians says what it says.

Deuteronomy 5:32

The Lord has said the woman was not-married, thus we should not turn to the right hand and to the left in order to avoid that truth, but receive the truth in love.

So No, I'm not irritated. I might be if I didn't "fully" understand that it's not my job to prove to you, or convince you of anything. If I thought it was my job to teach you, then yes I might get irritated at my lack of success. But I understand I am merely giving testimony to the word of God, and it's the Spirit that reveals truth to anyone. We both can learn, or neither of us can learn, as the Spirit allows. That you still don't understand is not a cause for my irritation, just simply another reason for prayer. And that's always a good thing.


Quote
>>>
the previous ones dissolved, then marriage really is not permanent and death is NOT what dissolves a union as scripture teaches..
<<<

The scriptures teach that nothing should dissolve the marriage union but death, but it also teaches that man can and does "unlawfully" pull asunder what God hath joined together. The way you are understanding this is that it is impossible that anyone get a divorce, or that it is impossible that anyone can pull asunder what God hath joined together. But ask yourself "HONESTLY," if that was truly what Christ meant, then why did he say..

Matthew 19:6

Let Not man pull it asunder. He's telling man don't separate [chorizo] [me] or do not separate. No pulling asunder. i.e., man should not separate what God has joined together. He's not saying it's impossible for a couple to Divorce. He's saying "don't Divorce," stay together "AS IF" you were one flesh. For a man to break such a union vowed before God by putting away his wife for any (not every) reason, is disobedience. Thus the question of the Pharisees was answered. There cannot be divorce for ANY cause or reason.


Quote
>>>
You also say that confession makes the adultery a non sin..
<<<

I never said that. I said if we confess our sins, He is faithful to forgive us our sins. Likewise, if we pretend we have no sins, then our sins will remain.

Quote
>>>
make the person a repentant adulterer..
<<<

Confession is the outward action of an inward recognition. When we recognize that we have sinned, we repent, and confess our sins. When a person who has divorced and remarried recognizes the sin of this her/his adulterous act, yes they confess their sin before God. But they cannot compound one sin by adding another on top of it by divorcing "again." And they most certainly cannot go back to the first wife/husband. Because it's an abomination.


Quote
>>>
Can a homosexual confess his guilt, yet remain in the relationship that God has called sin?
<<<

Wow, apples and oranges! A homosexual cannot repent and remain a homosexual because homosexuality is sin moring, noon and nightime, at all times, anytime, continuing abomination before God. There is no acceptable homosexuality period, at any time. Marriage was a vow, not a continuing sin at all times. It's one sin. Something we did once. The remarriage was a single act of rebellion and sin, but it's done and over and if truly repented of, it's forgiven. The person is not remaining in sin, he is legitimately married, though he "did" so unlawfully and adulterated his first marriage. But you are saying that a spouse should now set off on a course of willfully committing the sin of Divorcing the second spouse (showing he has no real repentance for his divorce the first time), and then compounding the sin by committing the "abomination" of returning to the first husband. My, My, You know not what you ask.


Quote
>>>
#3 above----never in the Deut. 24:1-4 passage do we see the woman guilty of adultery in the remarriage-----as is the case when divorce and remarriage occurs in the NT teachings.   As a matter of fact, in the wordage of the writ of divorcement, the woman was given permission to remarry without sin.
<<<

Yes, we all know there was divorce and remarriage in the OT. But you've again ignored the "whole point" which is that in no instance can a woman who was divorced by her husband, and has married another, "return" to her first husband. She's deemed a polluted land unto her first husband. But you are saying that is exactly what the New Testament woman should do. Go right back to her first husband contrary to all that God has declared on the subject.


Quote
>>>
In Deut. 24, if the second husband died, the first STILL couldn't have her----even though she is free to remarry, in the Lord.   Why is that?  
<<<

We don't have to speculate, we know why. It's because it is an abomination to the Lord that a divorced woman should go marry another, and then later return to her first husband. You cannot pass wives "back and forth" among multiple husbands, it's confusion, an abomination unto the Lord. Don't you understand the principle here? God uses this law in Jeremiah to demonstrate this.


Quote
>>>
Could it be because God was setting down a precedent for hardheartedness?   If you put away a wife for "defilement/something unclean", you will never be able to have her back again.
<<<

No, you're making stuff up as you go along. God didn't say they cannot go back to their first Husband because they were hard-hearted. Where is your Biblical basis for saying any of this stuff? Speculation and supposition is no basis for interpretation of scripture. This is "pure" rationalizing away of God's law concerning returning to a previous husband once you have been remarried, because you don't want to deal with the "truth" of the matter as delineated in scripture. Because it is contrary to your stated position. Nevertheless, we cannot conform scripture to our own views, we must conform our own views to scripture.


Quote
>>>
 If the reason you put her away is defilement, how much more is she defiled after being married to another..
<<<

You say there is no divorce in the NT, it's just adultery and a wife should be able to go back to the first husband. Now here in the OT you say God established this law of not going back to the first husband because the previous wife was defiled by being "MARRIED" to another man and thus it is abomination to go back with the first husband.

..Bingo!

And the same with the New Testament, it is a abomination unto God to pass wives around back and forth. It's as a polluted land that he cannot return to. So what's wrong with this picture that you are painting about the immutable God concerning this issue? That you understand perfectly why the woman cannot go back to the first husband, but since it's contrary to your stated position, you'll believe that God changed in the NT and now He doesn't care that wives are passed around back and forth between husbands. Is God the author of confusion?

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Colleen on February 18, 2005, 01:00:05 PM
1st Corinthians 7:10
  • "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
    • But and If she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife[/i]."
    You say that there is still a bond to her husband, obviously not, since Paul says she was "SEPARATED" and also says that she was "UNMARRIED." The Greek word married is [gameo]. The word for unmarried (literally a negation of marriage, in NOT-married) is [agameo], and that is the word that is used here by inspiration of God. So unambiguously, while you make the claim the woman is still joined to the Husband, God uses the Greek word [chorizo], meaning that she was separated, not joined. And by the way, in case you were not aware of it, that this is the exact same word [chorizo] that is used in Matthew 19 when Christ said "let not man [chorizo], or pull apart" ( separate) what God has joined together. So you are making my point for me, rather than strengthening your argument. Truth is like that. It seeks it's own level.
That's an outstanding point Tony, and one which I had not previously known, even though I had been convinced by scripture divorce was not permitted. I never knew those were the same words used in the same context of marriage and divorce or being unmarried. Thank you for that information.

 Colossians 3:19 "Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them."

I think the "be not bitter against them" part of the command is the part that most husbands neglect. I think a lot of divorces could be avoided if husbands would just obey this part. And I wish some preachers would preach on that for a change. I do need clarification on the remarriage to the first husband. You are saying that even if the second husband dies, she still cannot marry the first again? Why, death breaks the marriage, correct?


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 21, 2005, 02:52:23 AM
Quote
There's nothing to address. We "ALL" know Divorce was allowed in the Old Testament by the law of Moses. It's what Christ addressed in matthew 19. So this is a non-issue. We both know Moses allowed divorce.
Quote
>>>

Scripture does not show that the men in Ezra sinned when they put away their wives.   Scripture also does not show that God sinned when He divorced Israel.   The issue here is:  is Divorce sin?   You say "yes---every time it is sin..........." I say "well, in most cases yes, but not in all cases as is shown in at least 2 OT passages".   You believe in order to repent from adultery that divorce should not occur.   I contend that IF the second marriage is adultery and not a lawful marriage in God's eyes, such as those in Ezra 9-10, then yes, repentance would involve forsaking the relationship God calls sin.   In those types of cases, divorce would NOT be sin----it would be an act of repentance from adultery.


Quote
>>>God nowhere says He permits Divorce. I "assume" you must be referring to the oft-misinterpreted "fornication exception" of Matthew 19:9. In truth, understanding that passage to say people can divorce for fornication because of the law of Moses makes the whole context of Christ's words Nonsensical.


Well, actually, no, that is not the passage I'm thinking of.   My point is only that not always is divorce sinful-----I was referencing the OT passages in Ezra 9-10 and Jer. 3.


Quote
>>>If you mean the early Church as in Old Testament saints, we know Divorce was allowed. as I just explained, it was for the hardness of their heart. If you mean early Church as in secular history documenting the Church after Christ, it's inadmissible as "Biblical" justification for Divorce. You know that! So can I assume this means that you really have no Biblical justification for Divorce? You have no scripture that says we can Divorce? None?  You have no quote of Christ saying the Divorced were never really Divorced, or saying the remarried are not really remarried? No such verses exist at all, do they? And indeed, how could they exist when Christ Himself clearly tells us not to marry "A Divorced" person. Clearly, a person can be Divorced. And Christ is not the author of confusion.

No, I'm speaking of NT early church saints----in practice they divorced unrepentant adulterers/adulteress (As God did in Jer. 3), but they remained unmarried waiting for repentance in their spouses.   I dont' give this example as a justification of Divorce as I am 100% against divorce.   In any case,  I'm seeing that I and you are miles apart on our understanding of divorce.   It appears to me that you believe divorce dissolves what God joined together.   I don't.   One can't commit adultery------literally, if not "joined" to another.   If divorce dissolved the union God joined together, there would be no adultery, period.   


Quote
>>>

Once again, you are talking "AS IF" when someone marries, they are "literally" sewed together and cannot be separated. Not so. Christ uses the figure of the "one Flesh" principle to illustrate that Divorce is not ever permissible. Not to illustrate that they are sewed together and it's impossible to separate them. It is a token that they should not be puulled apart, not that they cannot be pulled apart. Obviously they can be, in disobedience to God's law that they shouldn't.

yes, that is my belief-----"joined/bound"  IS something TIGHT----only to be undone by DEATH as Paul states...........not divorce, not separation, not desertion, not adultery...........just death.  That is exactly the point Paul was making by using an adulteress (remarried woman) in his analogy of the law/Christ.   Even her remarriage/adultery does not break the "bond" she has with her 1st husband.

Quote
>>>
That's why Christ says what God has joined together "LET NOT MAN PUT ASUNDER." Obviously then, man can pull it asunder, and Christ is commanding him "not to do it."

You are trying to prove something without use of scriptures, but just with smoke and mirrors, but it cannot be done. A woman who had "had" a previous husband, but is married to a current husband, has pulled apart what God has joined together by covenant marriage. She is not justified in doing it again for the second husband anymore than she was justified in doing it the first time.

asunder:  #5563----place room between, part, to go away, depart, put asunder, separate.

Yes, we can go away from our spouses, we can separate, we can depart, place room between...........but can we DISSOLVE what God joined together?   Rom. 7:2-3 and I Cor. 7:39 appears to say that "no" we cannot dissolve, unwind, unbind, etc ourselves from who GOD joined/bound us to-------only death will undo what God has joined.


Quote
>>>
In I Cor. 7:10-11 we see that ****although**** Paul calls the woman "unmarried", there is still a bond to her husband and HE is the only one she can be married to.
<<<
You say "although" as if it was insignificant that "GOD" (not Paul) says that the woman who has Divorced was "unmarried." Clearly, this is a self-serving action on your part. Nevertheless, every word of God is divinely inspired, and God says this woman who divorced was UNMARRIED! Try as you may to get around this truth by saying "although," the Biblical facts speak for themselves.

Tony, I do not have issue with the "unmarried" part at all.   I see this as something the Lord acknowledged, but in the same breath, a prohibition was issued-----NO REMARRIAGE----only reconciliation to your HUSBAND .   The point I was making is that there is indeed a "bond" shown-----a bond not broken by the "departing".......A bond which will be there until the husband's death----or wife's.   As I said, obviously we see "marriage" in a very different light Tony.   When reading your teaching on this topic I thought "YES!!!   Preach it Brother!!!................"   until I got down to your last section on the "now whats"..........which to me, is inconsistant with the rest of your teaching.   Now I understand why----you believe that Divorce dissolves a union God put together-----even though GOD prohibits divorces and calls remarriages adultery.   You believe God prohibits divorce, but in the same breath you believe..........."but if you do divorce and commit adultery by marrying another...........just verbally confess it and you're ok with God".   In other words, though you take a "tough" stance on divorce/remarriage, you believe as most of the professing church does-----the permanency of marriage is really just an "ideal"............it is something to aspire to, but since man is fallible, they will rebel and fall short.  See, many of the liberal in the Church see this stance as wishy washy.   They say at least those who believe in no divorce/no remarriage are consistant in application because they see ANY relationship outside that one the Lord joined, is sin.   Only death dissolves that union, freeing the one left to remarry, in the Lord.   The other camps don't know how to consistantly deal with the "bound" issue-----it's very gray.    Ultimately, those who believe the bond is dissolveable outside of death believe that MAN dictates to God what HE will join, not the other way around.   God calls something adultery(sin against their covenant spouse)...........man says "God must now join this and make it a lawful union"...............

Quote
>>>
The "bond"---what God joined, is not dissolved in spite of a remarriage.
<<<
But if she was to remarry, then despite your protests, it is an abomination to God for her to return to the previous husband. Really, you're making "my point" for me. God is unchanging, He is immutable, and though you may not understand it, His laws against returning to a previous spouse after remarriage was not done away with. This woman has "ONLY" two options. Stay single, or return to her husband. Which has been my consistent stand about this from the start. If remarried, she cannot return to her husband, as you believe she should. ...and it's CLEAR.

You keep going back to Deut. 24 and this is not the same case at all.   The woman who is divorced is PERMITTED to remarry.   She is NOT told to "remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband".   She was NOT guilty of adultery.   In the NT passages a woman is PROHIBITED from remarriage.   If she does remarry, she will be guilty of ADULTERY-----because she is joined to her 1st husband until death.    If you say in the NT cases a person cannot repent from (forsake) an adulterous remarriage, do you also feel the same about extramarital affairs?   In God's eyes, what is the difference?   Both relationships are called adultery.   In NT scripture there is NO indication anywhere that God "joins" this adulterous union HE calls sin.....to the contrary (Rom. 7:2-3).

Quote
what you are exhorting her to do (return to her first husband) is an abomination to God, as testified in Deuteronomy. But it's also further illustrated in Jeremiah.

Jeremiah 3:1
No, she shall not return to the first husband, because it is an abomination to God. You cannot just ignore this Biblical principle just because it doesn't "agree" with your belief that a wife shouyld return to her first husband.
Quote

See the part in Jer. 3 that is highlighted and underlined.................

Quote
>>>
<<<

The scriptures teach that nothing should dissolve the marriage union but death, but it also teaches that man can and does "unlawfully" pull asunder what God hath joined together. The way you are understanding this is that it is impossible that anyone get a divorce, or that it is impossible that anyone can pull asunder what God hath joined together. But ask yourself "HONESTLY," if that was truly what Christ meant, then why did he say..

No, Paul taught that nothing COULD, not should as you say above---- dissolve the bond of marriage, but death.   

Quote
>>>
Can a homosexual confess his guilt, yet remain in the relationship that God has called sin?
<<<

Wow, apples and oranges! A homosexual cannot repent and remain a homosexual because homosexuality is sin moring, noon and nightime, at all times, anytime, continuing abomination before God. There is no acceptable homosexuality period, at any time. Marriage was a vow, not a continuing sin at all times. It's one sin. Something we did once. The remarriage was a single act of rebellion and sin, but it's done and over and if truly repented of, it's forgiven. The person is not remaining in sin, he is legitimately married, though he "did" so unlawfully and adulterated his first marriage. But you are saying that a spouse should now set off on a course of willfully committing the sin of Divorcing the second spouse (showing he has no real repentance for his divorce the first time), and then compounding the sin by committing the "abomination" of returning to the first husband. My, My, You know not what you ask.

No acceptable homosexuality, but acceptable adultery?   Does a vow make adultery a non sin?   Is God obligated to honor our "vows" when He says the relationship is sin?   There is no evidence that an adulterous remarriage is anything but continual sin until the 1st spouse dies.   As I said before, if there were scripture to the contrary, I would gladly.........GLADLY change my current viewpoint on this.   The fact remains that homosexuality AND adultery are not acceptable in the Lord's sight-----saying "til death do us part" to someone else will not undo the first marriage God joined and Paul taught would endure "til death".


[
Quote
>>>
 If the reason you put her away is defilement, how much more is she defiled after being married to another..
<<<


You say there is no divorce in the NT, it's just adultery and a wife should be able to go back to the first husband. Now here in the OT you say God established this law of not going back to the first husband because the previous wife was defiled by being "MARRIED" to another man and thus it is abomination to go back with the first husband.

And the same with the New Testament, it is a abomination unto God to pass wives around back and forth. It's as a polluted land that he cannot return to. So what's wrong with this picture that you are painting about the immutable God concerning this issue? That you understand perfectly why the woman cannot go back to the first husband, but since it's contrary to your stated position, you'll believe that God changed in the NT and now He doesn't care that wives are passed around back and forth between husbands. Is God the author of confusion?


You say the wife was defiled by being MARRIED to another, scripture does not state that.   The writ of divorcement gave PERMISSION to remarry WITHOUT sin------so her "defilement" couldn't have been her remarriage, since it was permitted.  Her defilement had to do with the reason her 1st husband put her away.   That was why he could not have her back again.  However, read Jer. 3 again.........the Lord says "THEY SAY.........WOULD NOT THE LAND BE GREATLY POLLUTED?"..........yet "I SAY RETURN TO ME"..........I think the Lord made it pretty clear in this passage that it was not HE who dictated Deut. 24:1-4............but THEY.   HE will take back His wife DESPITE MANY harlotries.......In Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 21, 2005, 10:11:59 AM
>>>
Scripture does not show that the men in Ezra sinned when they put away their wives.   Scripture also does not show that God sinned when He divorced Israel.   The issue here is:  is Divorce sin?   You say "yes---every time it is sin..........." I say "well, in most cases yes, but not in all cases as is shown in at least 2 OT passages".
<<<

You keep repeating this, even when I've already acknowledged divorce was allowed in the Old Testament. So why are you contending Divorce was allowed in the Old Testament? I agree with you, divorce was allowed in the old Testament. Did you not read my post?


Quote
>>>
Well, actually, no, that is not the passage I'm thinking of.   My point is only that not always is divorce sinful-----I was referencing the OT passages in Ezra 9-10 and Jer. 3.
<<<

Again, in an abbreviated form.

Matthew 19:7-8

i.e., Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of their hearts, but from the beginning it was not to be so. Clearly, Christ is saying that in the OT divorce was allowed because (a whole Bible study in itself) of the hardness of their heart, but now it's not to be so because that's not what God intended from the beginning. Clear? From the beginning God intended a "one flesh" union (Genesis 2:24), inseparable. Christ is referencing Genesis when He says two are to be as one flesh. So again, I have no contention that divorce was allowed in the Old Testament. ...because of the hardness of their heart. You know what that means, right?


Quote
>>>
No, I'm speaking of NT early church saints----in practice they divorced unrepentant adulterers/adulteress..
<<<

I could give you a whole 10 page rebuttal on that, but I won't. Secular history is not inspired, cannot be trusted, and is not useful for determining doctrine. I'm talking about doctrines from the word of God, not hearsay. The early Church did a lot of things, so we hear. That's why it's not inspired, only truth is. Thatís why we established this forum to discuss doctrines "from" the basis of the Bible alone. Sola Scriptura! Because we can never trust secular history.


Quote
>>>
In any case,  I'm seeing that I and you are miles apart on our understanding of divorce.
<<<

Actually we're not as far apart as you make it seem. We both believe that the Bible teaches that we cannot divorce (I suspect) for any reason, and in this day and age, that make us quite "rare" and quite similar. Our disagreement is not so much in our understanding of divorce (We can not divorce), but in our understanding of remarriage after divorce. i.e., because you don't seem to recognize man divorcing, you don't recognize a remarriage. Even though God does recognize it in speaking of those who have "remarried," as adulterers. My belief is that we cannot "remarry" if we cannot "remarry." In other words, why is Christ talking about those who have "remarried" if no one can remarry?  Only one answer. ..Because they can and have remarried!


Quote
>>>
 It appears to me that you believe divorce dissolves what God joined together.
<<<

Well, since Christ warned not to pull apart what God has joined together, yes, then by normal use of grammatics, divorce pulls apart what God has joined together. So as Christ commands, let us not do it! many do it anyway!


Quote
>>>
 One can't commit adultery------literally, if not "joined" to another.
<<<

Adultery means to forsake your spouse for another by means of any sexual act or just by simple lust.

Mark 10:11-12

He has forsaken his spouse for another by means of a sexual act with another wife, pulling apart what God has joined together (put away). When he married another, he committed adultery. ..It's not that complicated! In this verse we see God (Not Tony) declaring that these people have been "divorced" from their spouse. And it's important to understand that I didn't say that they had "put away" their spouses, Christ did. While you contend that's impossible because of the "one flesh" rule, Christ says this is exactly what they did (Divorced their spouses).


Quote
>>>
Once again, you are talking "AS IF" when someone marries, they are "literally" sewed together and cannot be separated. Not so. Christ uses the figure of the "one Flesh" principle to illustrate that Divorce is not ever permissible. Not to illustrate that they are sewed together and it's impossible to separate them. It is a token that they should not be pulled apart, not that they cannot be pulled apart. Obviously they can be, in disobedience to God's law that they shouldn't.

yes, that is my belief-----"joined/bound"  IS something TIGHT----only to be undone by DEATH as Paul states
<<<

That's my belief also. The "law" of God is that marriage is a tight bond, only to be undone by death. We agree! Yet man by nature moves to being "LAWLESS" and He doesn't want to "OBEY" God's laws. And so he does "undo" what God has joined together by putting away his wife. That's a given. That is why Christ condemned it and warned that such action was adultery against the spouse. In order to alert people that it is "unlawful" to do this and forsaking one spouse for another. i.e., adultery.

Leviticus 26:15-16

A covenant can be broken, because it is an Oath, a promise, a Vow between two people before God. Covenants before God are broken all the time.


Quote
>>>
asunder:  #5563----place room between, part, to go away, depart, put asunder, separate.

Yes, we can go away from our spouses, we can separate, we can depart, place room between...........but can we DISSOLVE what God joined together?
<<<

Carol, that's [chorizo] the word Christ used, not I. You understand that, right? God inspired unadulterated text.

Matthew 19:6

He's not talking about a 65 Chevy, He's talking about "marriage" and "Divorce" and how man when man is married he is not to [chorizo] that marriage by Divorce. That's the whole "TOPIC" of Christ's conversation there. Is there Divorce for any cause (reason)! We can't ignore the whole context and declare [chorizo] is not talking about a separation or breaking of the marriage bond in divorce when "that is" the context. Likewise in the "context" of Corinthians:

1st Corinthians 7:10-11

If she divorces her husband she is to remain [a'gamos] or "NOT" married, and cannot marry someone else, or else she is to return again to her husband. Again, while you go through much OT text explaining away how she is still married, the word of God says that she is "NOT" married. For that is what [a'gamos] means. e.g., [a] {negation}, [gamos] {married}.

1st Corinthians 7:32-33

Clearly, this means that this person is "NOT" married. [gamos] means married, [a'gamos] is a negation of marriage, meaning not married. You cannot get away from that truth. She simply is "not " married if we are going by "authority" of scripture. e.g.,

1st Corinthians 7:34

Again, without ambiguity, we see that this word [a'gamos] means one is "NOT" married. And so we cannot take this same word in 1st Corinthians 7:10-11 and pretend that this woman who divorced and has put asunder [chorizo] what God hath joined together in leaving her Husband, is "still Married" to him. You say I'm inconsistent, but this is downright denying what is written. For that would make the scriptures untrue when it declares she was "NOT" Married. And as I said before, her options are limited. She can stay divorced, or she can remarry her Husband. But under no circumstances is she to marry someone else. And (no surprise to me), these are the "options" Paul, under inspiration of God, also gives her.


Quote
>>>
Rom. 7:2-3 and I Cor. 7:39 appears to say that "no" we cannot dissolve, unwind, unbind, etc ourselves from who GOD joined/bound us to-------only death will undo what God has joined.
<<<

I agree! But it doesn't "appear" to say that, it "does" say that. Death is the only thing that will "legally" allow a spouse to remarry. But when has man ever had the penchant for listening to the "law" of God? That indeed is a law of God, but laws can be broken. They're broken all the time. And that is what you seem to be missing here. No one is arguing against this being a law of God. I am arguing against your "seeming" conclusion that this means the law cannot be broken. I contend that it can be broken because God says it can, and explains what to do when in fact the law is broken. Remain unmarried, or return to the Husband.


Quote
>>>
You say "although" as if it was insignificant that "GOD" (not Paul) says that the woman who has Divorced was "unmarried." Clearly, this is a self-serving action on your part. Nevertheless, every word of God is divinely inspired, and God says this woman who divorced was UNMARRIED! Try as you may to get around this truth by saying "although," the Biblical facts speak for themselves.

Tony, I do not have issue with the "unmarried" part at all.   I see this as something the Lord acknowledged, but in the same breath, a prohibition was issued-----NO REMARRIAGE----only reconciliation to your HUSBAND .
<<<

But while you say you don't have an issue with the "unmarried" part at all, your whole argument is that the woman is "not divorced" and so can return to her husband. So how can you say you have no issue with her being "unmarried?" If she was not divorced and still the wife of her husband, she certainly could not be called unmarried or literally be said to be NOT married!


Quote
>>>
The point I was making is that there is indeed a "bond" shown-----a bond not broken by the "departing".......A bond which will be there until the husband's death----or wife's.
<<<

But that's the bond that Christ said should not be put asunder [chorizo], and that Paul, in speaking of this woman said "had" [chorizo] done, and that the woman was now [a'gamos] or "Not Married." Clearly, a breaking of this joining of man and woman in the marriage covenant has taken place in such a case.


Quote
>>>
As I said, obviously we see "marriage" in a very different light Tony.   When reading your teaching on this topic I thought "YES!!!   Preach it Brother!!!................"   until I got down to your last section on the "now whats".
<<<

Did you think you would agree with someone on all points? We are allowed to disagree  :)


Quote
>>>
.........which to me, is inconsistant with the rest of your teaching.   Now I understand why----you believe that Divorce dissolves a union God put together--
<<<

Only in the sense that all disobedience to God's covenants dissolves, or more accurately put, makes God's laws of non-effect. And man has been doing that since the beginning. Covenant breakers are nothing new. So why should you think that to break the covenant of marriage would be impossible?


Quote
>>>
You believe God prohibits divorce, but in the same breath you believe..........."but if you do divorce and commit adultery by marrying another...........just verbally confess it and you're ok with God".
<<<

I don't think I've said that, in fact I have gone out of my way to say that repentance is promised to no one. I said that no one should "tempt" God by thinking that they can divorce and remarry, and ask God for forgiveness thinking all is OK. I even gave the example of Esau who afterward sought repentance with tears, and yet never received it. You're just not reading my replies, or else you're not hearing them. One or the other. Because just verbally confessing sin is not a guarantee of anything, much less forgiveness. Election is not based on anything man does, and that includes verbally seeking repentance. ..as I demonstrated in Esau seeking it.


Quote
>>>
In other words, though you take a "tough" stance on divorce/remarriage, you believe as most of the professing church does-----the permanency of marriage is really just an "ideal"
<<<

Not really. I believe that God "commands" marriage to be a permanent institution. Not an ideal, a model, or a standard of excellence, but it's to be an actuality. It's not something to aspire to, it's a law we are to keep. And thousands of Christians keep it. They remain married and they never divorce, proving it is an actuality, not an ideal. Yet there are the rebellious, and there always will be.

Psalms 107:11

But I also understand that man is desperately wicked who despise the counsel of God. I understand that without God's influence, man will break God's laws whenever it suits his purpose. That's a given because we cannot underestimate the "will of man" in his rebellion. And a marriage covenant cannot stop it anymore than a covenant with Israel stopped their rebellion against it.


Quote
>>>
See, many of the liberal in the Church see this stance as wishy washy.  
<<<

Liberal Churches always (without exception) say that my stance is far too strict, follows the law too literally, is far to conservative, and far too mindful of the authority of the Bible. ..I don't think you need to worry about liberal Churches thinking I'm wishy washy. They're too busy saying I'm legalistic to worry about that. ;)

Anyway, can't start formulating my doctrines with an eye on what liberal Churches will think. I'm a witness to the word, as honestly as I can, and they can take it or leave it (as God allows).


Quote
>>>
You keep going back to Deut. 24 and this is not the same case at all.
<<<

I keep going back only because you seem to not understand the way God looks at a divorced woman going back to her husband as a spiritual pollution, an unrighteous confusion or mixing that God calls an abomination.


Quote
>>>
She is NOT told to "remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband".
<<<

By God specifically saying that she could not return to her first husband "IF" she had remarried, the implication of Deuteronomy 24 is that she could return to him "IF SHE HAD NOT" remarried. But the marrying another is what defiled her that she could not return.


Quote
>>>
She was NOT guilty of adultery.
<<<

Deuteronomy 24:1

The word translated "uncleanness" is a synonym for unlawful nakedness, or what we would call today, fornication. Which in a marriage situation with another man is adultery.


Quote
>>>
In the NT passages a woman is PROHIBITED from remarriage.   If she does remarry, she will be guilty of ADULTERY
<<<

Agreed! She's also prohibited from Divorce. That's my whole point. No Divorce and no remarriage, ever! That's my position. That's what God commands. Yet man, as he was in the Old Testament, is rebellious and disobedient to God's commands.


Quote
>>>
If you say in the NT cases a person cannot repent from (forsake) an adulterous remarriage, do you also feel the same about extramarital affairs?
<<<

I don't follow you!?! Repenting from an adulterous remarriage has nothing to do with deliberately divorcing, remarrying, and returning to an already previously divorced husband. That is sin on top of sin on top of sin. The sin of Divorce, the sin of remarriage, and the sin of another divorce, and another remarriage. That's not the evidence of a conscientious Christian, rather of someone who doesn't understand God's covenant marriage institution.

As for extramarital affairs, they repent/forgive and remain. We cannot divorce. Period! I've said that 5 times already, yet you ask me again 5 "different" ways what I say in another instance. The answer is no, no, and no. Not to mention, no! We cannot lawfully divorce, ever for any reason! The marriage bond is to be as if we are one flesh, inseparable.


Quote
>>>
See the part in Jer. 3 that is highlighted and underlined.................
<<<

Jeremiah 3:1

I said God used this Old Testament law in "symbolism" of Israel in Jeremiah. I was referring to the first part (not highlighted) of the verse speaking of the "law" of a divorced wife not returning to her husband after she was remarried because she's as a polluted land. Obviously God is using this in a "spiritual" application for Israel, but it's the law that is the topic of our discussion. The "LAW" that it's an abomination for her to return to her husband, not the symbolism God uses this law to illustrate how He is merciful to Israel.


Quote
>>>
No acceptable homosexuality, but acceptable adultery?   Does a vow make adultery a non sin?
<<<

Did I say adultery was acceptable or was a non-sin? I don't recall saying anything remotely like that. ..Do you?


Quote
>>>
You say the wife was defiled by being MARRIED to another, scripture does not state that.
<<<

No, I said as God said about her remarrying the "FIRST" Husband again after marriage. I say no more than the scripture says.

Deuteronomy 24:4
Jeremiah 3:1

Quite clearly the abomination, defiling, pollution, whatever you want to call it, is in the confusion of having her go from one husband to another husband and back again to the first husband. It's not in her marrying again, but in her returning to the previous spouse after she's been remarried.


Quote
>>>
I think the Lord made it pretty clear in this passage that it was not HE who dictated Deut. 24:1-4............but THEY.   HE will take back His wife DESPITE MANY harlotries.......In Him, Cindy
<<<

God didn't dictate Deuteronomy 24? ..this is starting to sound a lot like rationalizing to me.

nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Carol on February 21, 2005, 11:04:27 AM
Cindy,
There are many laws and commands in the bible for us to follow, but just because they say we SHOULD NOT do something, does not mean we CANNOT do it. 

Matthew 19:6 says:
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

NOT:
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh.  What therefore God hath joined together, man CANNOT put asunder.

I think we are being told we should not do it.  It is sin to do it.  But man is a sinful, depraved creature and breaks God's laws and commands.

This is what I understand Tony to be saying.

Blessings,
Carol
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Beechwood on February 21, 2005, 01:48:46 PM
Cindy, I think the problem is that you don't understand Matthew says that we should not loose what God has joined, not that we cannot.

 Mt 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

What God is saying is, let not this be done. Not that it cannot ever be done. Look at the same type sentence in 1st Timothy.

 1Ti 5:16 If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.
 17  Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

It's not saying the Church cannot be burdened by support, it's saying, don't let the Church be charged or burdened by it. So you are understanding "let not" to be saying it cannot happen, when it is really an instruction not to do it.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 22, 2005, 09:05:26 AM
Cindy, I think the problem is that you don't understand Matthew says that we should not loose what God has joined, not that we cannot.

 Mt 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
What God is saying is, let not this be done. Not that it cannot ever be done.

Hello Beechwood, Carol (and Tony),

My issue is not that divorce "can not" be done..........of course it can, just as we can murder, covet, lie, etc, etc.   We do have the power to sin...........and if born again, not to sin.   However, what we cannot do is dictate what GOD Himself will accept.   I wrote to someone with much knowledge in Greek and Hebrew and this was his response to this issue:

this is said in a legal context, to the rabbis who were judges in Israel (and still are, concerning marriage!) The meaning of this is the same as in the ten commandments, or in any law, instruction, or commandment: This you shall not do. (Or, specifically to judges: This you shall not allow.)
 
Of course you can divorce your wife (or, as a rabbi, allow the divorce) - and people did, and the rabbis allowed it - but the point is that this is not acceptable to God, and those divorced must come back together again - or else suffer the consequences. Just like something stolen must be returned - it's not OK for it to remain stolen just because it has been.
 
Throughout his ministry, Jesus spoke and taught as a rabbi, concerning what was allowed and not allowed in the eyes of God, not what was possible or impossible for people to do. This is not about somehow reaching into the heavens and undoing what God has decreed. We can't. What God has done, is done. The issue before us - as before the rabbis at the time - is whether we will follow God's lead, or not. It is about obedience.



Paul teaches in Rom. 7:2-3 and I Cor. 7:39 that marriage is indissoluable, even stating that divorce and corresponding remarriage do not negate that bond.   It is still there----just as the "bond" is still there in I Cor. 7:10 with the woman who is 'unmarried'.   Being 'unmarried', divorced or remarried does not change that bond.   God still views one "joined" with the first spouse----until the death of one of them.  Though there is a divorce/separation/space done by MAN, that does not mean that GOD unjoined this union.   As I've said before, if there were scripture which showed a new union called adultery was JOINED by God----HE having unjoined the previous union through man's act of civil divorce----I would have no point of disagreement.   However, there is none.   All we have shown are those relationships God calls sin(adultery) and those relationships He and Paul both taught were lifelong----irregardless of the sins committed.   

Some say God is merely an "observer" of the marriage covenant.   The problem with this viewpoint is that scripture does not teach that.   Scripture teaches that HE LITERALLY joins the one who marry------til death.  No civil act undoes what God has done.

Concerning "God hates divorce"-----scripture found in the OT----it has been clearly shown that not all divorce is SIN (Jer. 3, Ezra 9-10)...........yet, some try to apply "God hates divorce" to ALL situations---prohibiting divorces which are done for repentance sake.   God divorced, the men in Ezra divorced...........it was a necessary deed done due to SIN.   Those divorces were not SIN, they were the ramifications of sins committed.   To say one cannot undo a sin (an unlawful marriage), is to ignore exactly what was required of the men in Israel who had transgressed God's commands concerning the use of marriage.   Yes, the deeper meaning of "God hates divorce" is that He hates the SIN which causes divorces----unbiblical divorces as well as biblical divorces.   That is not playing fast and loose with the Word of God, that is acknowledging that God Himself divorced and HE did not sin.   If He did not sin, then it must have been other's SINs which grieved Him and caused Him to HAVE TO divorce Israel-----------so she would repent of her continual sins against Him.    He did not "tolerate" Himself to divorce----it was a necessity.   In Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Carol on February 22, 2005, 12:14:42 PM
Cindy,

I think you have misunderstood what I was saying.  The 'cannot' I was referring to was not 'cannot physically', but cannot be valid or cannot happen. 

You seem to be saying that because Christ says we SHOULD not, that means it is not valid or it did not really happen, but as Tony said (I think), because Christ talked about divorce, he must be saying it can happen and is acknowledged.  You seem to be saying it cannot even happen, that the divorce and remarriage is not even a reality.  It's just some man-made idea.

Cindy, I believe that apart from Christ, we are ALL in a state of continual adultry.  We ALL break the commandments, including the adultry one, everyday.  Our only hope is in Christ, our substitute, who kept all the commandments perfectly.  We should rest in him and look to him and the Holy Spirit will direct us in what we should and shouldn't do. I personally, think you are majoring on the minors.  This marriage issue seems to be a pet doctrine of yours.  I believe it's the only thing I've ever seen you post about. (I could be wrong about that).  Yes, it is important to try and keep God's commands, but we can't do it in our own power or even know what they really mean with our own understanding.  Our focus should not be on stopping sinning, our focus should be keeping our eyes on Christ, I believe.  When we are able to do this, the other things begin to fall into place.  The Holy Spirit will lead us and teach us his truths.

But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.  John 14:26

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.  1 Cor. 2:13

Many Blessings to you Cindy,
Carol
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 22, 2005, 01:52:23 PM
Cindy,

I think you have misunderstood what I was saying.  The 'cannot' I was referring to was not 'cannot physically', but cannot be valid or cannot happen. 

You seem to be saying that because Christ says we SHOULD not, that means it is not valid or it did not really happen, but as Tony said (I think), because Christ talked about divorce, he must be saying it can happen and is acknowledged.  You seem to be saying it cannot even happen, that the divorce and remarriage is not even a reality.  It's just some man-made idea.

Cindy, I believe that apart from Christ, we are ALL in a state of continual adultry.  We ALL break the commandments, including the adultry one, everyday.  Our only hope is in Christ, our substitute, who kept all the commandments perfectly.  We should rest in him and look to him and the Holy Spirit will direct us in what we should and shouldn't do. I personally, think you are majoring on the minors.  This marriage issue seems to be a pet doctrine of yours.  I believe it's the only thing I've ever seen you post about. (I could be wrong about that).  Yes, it is important to try and keep God's commands, but we can't do it in our own power or even know what they really mean with our own understanding.  Our focus should not be on stopping sinning, our focus should be keeping our eyes on Christ, I believe.  When we are able to do this, the other things begin to fall into place.  The Holy Spirit will lead us and teach us his truths.

But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.  John 14:26

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.  1 Cor. 2:13Many Blessings to you Cindy, Carol

Yes, I know it may appear the divorce and remarriage issue is a "pet" doctrine of mine and possibly that is true.  I think each of us has certain beliefs that are VERY strongly held due to what we believe we have been shown by God.   I USED to believe remarriage was OK with God-----til I got into His Word and the Holy Spirit showed me otherwise.   This is the wisdom of God share by His Grace with me.   Man says breaking covenant is AOK, God is subject to man's desires.   Not so.   Never has been, never will be.   God has determined the use of marriage.   We do not.   Am I now passionate about this very BIG problem in the Church?   Absolutely----as I am about other issues the Lord has shown me through study.   We all have areas of passion concerning "truth".   I've seen that in you as well in some of your postings concerning Arminianism vs. Calvinism.   I would not be so bold as to believe your passions are 'too' passionate or out of balance.   We as believers, each have our place in the Body of Christ----to build up the Body and we are not all equipped with the same level of knowledge, understanding, passions.   Truly I am thankful for the brothers and sisters who encourage me in their desire to seek truth and share that truth with me.

Concerning the adultery issue, yes, I believe that adultery not only is manifested in the physical, it is very much a spiritual thing as well.   There are things in believer's lives which have taken the place of God----spiritual adultery.   There is also the adultery of the heart concerning lusting after something/someone who does not belong to you.......Jesus spoke of this as well.   Neither type of adultery is acceptable to "remain in" once it is made known as such. 

All sins start in the heart...........many sins stay there and defile within, but are not apparent in the physical.   Seeking a divorce is a form of adultery.   A person no longer wants what they have.   They want something different---better they think.   Remarriage is a physical manifestation of the heart of adultery.   The adultery  now becomes manifested.   Do you believe what Paul taught in Rom. 7:2-3 is only a "spiritual" concept------that one can remain in this "adultery", yet still be bound to their original spouse until they die?    Paul says death is the only avenue to dissolvement of the original marriage bond------so concerning repentance of this adultery, what is one to do?

It seems to me that when this topic comes up this is usually what happens:   "yes, people sin, we all do, let's just keep our eyes on Christ"...........what does that mean exactly?   Are we not to seek the scriptures, testing all things (including the present day practices within the church) against the Word of God?   It seems to me that many want to "silence" even the discussion of this topic because they don't want those who are in remarriages to feel bad.   What about the multitudes of people who have not sought the scriptures to "see if it is so" (is remarriage continual adultery or is it a one time sin?) before they get married the first time.........What about the many, many who WILL divorce, believing it "wrong", but also believing if they marry another Christian, all will be well?   What about those who come upon the "adultery" passages AFTER they remarry and then believe themselves to be in an adulterous relationship not honored by God?    I know of a woman right now who has left her marriage because as she was studying the Word of God she was convicted she was in a state of adultery-----she married another woman's husband.   She said she felt like a bolt of lightning hit her.   There are many people who are in this woman's same position.   It should not be so.   Many could be spared the incredible grief suffered if they had only known what the scriptures teach BEFORE they entered into adulterous relationships they thought were ok with God.   

So yes, this issue IS important to me.   It NEEDS to be discussed so people will know--------remarriage=adultery.    This is not taught from the pulpits.   Most of those passages are conveniently left out of teachings on marriage and divorce.   According to the Barna studies, divorce/remarriage WITHIN the confessing church is more of a problem than in the unsaved world.   This is a big issue as it deals with unfaithfulness-------spiritually and physically---towards one's spouse as well as towards the Lord.   Remarriage is also a form of unforgiveness---------though many will deny that.    Adultery manifested is only the "outward" sign that a person/people have serious heart issues and yes, those NEED to be dealt with first and foremost, but the manifested adultery needs not be ignored in the process.   Blessings in Jesus, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Carol on February 22, 2005, 05:15:29 PM
Man says breaking covenant is AOK, God is subject to man's desires.   Not so.   Never has been, never will be. 

You also say breaking covenant is AOK, Cindy.  You just define WHEN it's AOK.  Second & beyond marriages are OK, first marriages are not.

I've seen that in you as well in some of your postings concerning Arminianism vs. Calvinism.   I would not be so bold as to believe your passions are 'too' passionate or out of balance. 

You may be right, but I prefer to call it True Gospel vs. False Gospel instead of Arminianism vs. Calvinism.  I do strongly believe we are to look to Christ alone for our salvation, and anything other than that is a false gospel.  And I believe the gospel is the most important truth in God's word.

It seems to me that when this topic comes up this is usually what happens:   "yes, people sin, we all do, let's just keep our eyes on Christ"...........what does that mean exactly? 

I believe it means to look to him alone and stop trying to do this and do that, just rest, and in doing that we will sin less, have more good works (even though we probably wont even know it) and grow in him more.  In fact, we will probably see more of our sinfulness and more of his goodness and grace.  It's hard for me to explain really, but I just know how I used to run around trying to do this good work and that good work, and avoid this sin and that sin, worrying all the while that I wasnt doing all I could or -- feeling proud of what I did do.  It's so much better to just rest in him.  He did it all.  There is nothing left for me to do.

Are we not to seek the scriptures, testing all things (including the present day practices within the church) against the Word of God?   It seems to me that many want to "silence" even the discussion of this topic because they don't want those who are in remarriages to feel bad.   What about the multitudes of people who have not sought the scriptures to "see if it is so" (is remarriage continual adultery or is it a one time sin?) before they get married the first time.........What about the many, many who WILL divorce, believing it "wrong", but also believing if they marry another Christian, all will be well?   What about those who come upon the "adultery" passages AFTER they remarry and then believe themselves to be in an adulterous relationship not honored by God?

Yes, we are to seek the scriptures and we will, if we are true believers because we love Christ and his word, because he put that love there.  And the Holy Spirit will teach his own the truth.   

According to the Barna studies, divorce/remarriage WITHIN the confessing church is more of a problem than in the unsaved world. 

I believe that to be the problem..... the CONFESSING church.  Not the TRUE church of God.  People need to hear the gospel.  When they truly HEAR it and believe it, the Holy Spirit will teach them what he wants them to know about marriage.

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.  John 16:13

This is a big issue as it deals with unfaithfulness-------spiritually and physically---towards one's spouse as well as towards the Lord.   Remarriage is also a form of unforgiveness---------though many will deny that.    Adultery manifested is only the "outward" sign that a person/people have serious heart issues and yes, those NEED to be dealt with first and foremost, but the manifested adultery needs not be ignored in the process. 

I believe people need to hear the gospel and when they do hear they will truly seek God's word and in prayer for his truths.  They won't be looking for excuses to do what they want and it won't be a BIG problem in the true church.

For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. 1 Cor. 2:2

Carol
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 22, 2005, 07:18:20 PM
You also say breaking covenant is AOK, Cindy.  You just define WHEN it's AOK.  Second & beyond marriages are OK, first marriages are not.
 

Carol, when a vow/covenant is in opposition to God's command, yes, I do believe "breaking covenant"ie; divorce is lawful.   It appears that is exactly the case in Ezra 9-10.   The only covenant of marriage I can see which is valid---To GOD, not civily, is that which God joins.   I cannot see how an adulterous remarriage is "joined" by God.   He never calls it anything but sin (adultery).


I do strongly believe we are to look to Christ alone for our salvation, and anything other than that is a false gospel.  And I believe the gospel is the most important truth in God's word.
 

I agree.

I believe it means to look to him alone and stop trying to do this and do that, just rest, and in doing that we will sin less, have more good works (even though we probably wont even know it) and grow in him more.  In fact, we will probably see more of our sinfulness and more of his goodness and grace.  It's hard for me to explain really, but I just know how I used to run around trying to do this good work and that good work, and avoid this sin and that sin, worrying all the while that I wasnt doing all I could or -- feeling proud of what I did do.  It's so much better to just rest in him.  He did it all.  There is nothing left for me to do.
 


I agree with this also.   What is left for the true believer is to let Christ reign IN US-----through obedience to the Word/Spirit of God.  It is not to "do good deeds" that drives a true believer, it is in thanksgiving for His unmerited Grace working in our lives and our desire to submit to His will----even in hard things so that Christ will be formed in us.   



I believe that to be the problem..... the CONFESSING church.  Not the TRUE church of God.  People need to hear the gospel.  When they truly HEAR it and believe it, the Holy Spirit will teach them what he wants them to know about marriage.
 


I agree that people need to hear the gospel.   However, Paul also taught that Doctrine was important as well------for the believer, and that is who I speak to concerning the divorce/remarriage doctrine.   The "world" does not care what Jesus and Paul taught------until they are converted........after that time, doctrine IS very important:   "ALL scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness;   That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works".......II Tim. 3:16-17.


I believe people need to hear the gospel and when they do hear they will truly seek God's word and in prayer for his truths.  They won't be looking for excuses to do what they want and it won't be a BIG problem in the true church. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. 1 Cor. 2:2† Carol†

It is my belief that there are some TRUE believers who enter into unlawful marriages simply because others they esteem tell them it's ok---the blind leading the blind.    They do not know what the Word of God teaches.   That's why we hear "I think.............somebody told me............My pastor said" and not "The Word of God says..............."    Unfortunately, the flesh wants what it wants and goes looking for others to encourage it to do what it wants to do(II Tim. 4).   The church "system" now is so infiltrated by ungodliness it reminds me of righteous Lot----whose soul was vexed by living daily in a society full of ungodliness.   He was so affected he was willing to give his daughters over to be raped........He was desensitized and due to that, was willing to sin himself.   So it goes today in most of the professing church.   Many TRUE saints are vexed today and due to what is accepted around them, they are making decisions that are NOT based on God's Word.    Here's an interesting article on Fox news about this very topic.   Check out the last paragraphs:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,148379,00.html

Blessings in Jesus, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Carol on February 22, 2005, 10:46:41 PM
Quote
Carol, when a vow/covenant is in opposition to God's command, yes, I do believe "breaking covenant"ie; divorce is lawful.   It appears that is exactly the case in Ezra 9-10. 

Divorce was lawful in the old testament. 

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house.

Ezra 9-10 is in the old testament. 

But since you believe that when a vow/covenant is in opposition to God's command, divorce is lawful, do you believe divorce is lawful when a believer marries an unbeliever? 

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

Is that not a command of God?  But many people do it anyway.  Is divorce lawful for them?  If you use the same principal you used in Ezra 9-10, it must be, right?

Blessings,
Carol
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 23, 2005, 10:34:52 AM
Divorce was lawful in the old testament. 

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house.

Ezra 9-10 is in the old testament. 

But since you believe that when a vow/covenant is in opposition to God's command, divorce is lawful, do you believe divorce is lawful when a believer marries an unbeliever? 

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

Is that not a command of God?  But many people do it anyway.  Is divorce lawful for them?  If you use the same principal you used in Ezra 9-10, it must be, right?[/color]

Some divorces were TOLERATED for HARDHEARTEDNESS(such as Deut. 24:1-4), other divorces were in repentance of unlawful marriages(Ezra 9-10) or in the case of God, divorce was in response to unrepentant adultery.   In God's case, His reason for divorce was to force his "wife" to repent and return to Him.

I think it's pretty clear that Jesus DID allow the putting away for a specific cause---porneia (Mt. 19:9, 5:32).   What I don't see is a right to divorce and then remarry for those who have "FULLY married"----those GOD joined together.   The "except for" clause cannot be ignored.   To say God disallows "putting away" would not be accurate.   Whether it is BEFORE(Mt. 1:18-24) or AFTER the people come together in a final ceremony is what is disputed by many today.    What cannot be disputed is that Paul taught WHEN the marriage is JOINED BY GOD, it cannot be undone by man's sins..........even the sin of adultery (remarriage).   What God joined will endure til death------whether one finds themself in the 'unmarried' state (I Cor. 7:10-11) or whether they enter into sin (adultery) with another.   Death and death alone is what Paul taught dissolved the union God joins and frees the person left to be "joined by God" to another.

As for the unbeliever and believer entering into a marriage-----I'm pretty consistant on this:   God is not an observer to a marriage-----He literally JOINS two people in a lifelong union.   What God forbids, I do not believe He joins (adulterous unions, homosexual unions, believer/unbeliever unions).   He is not subject to our rebellion and I think people will be hard pressed to present a scriptural case to the contrary, but I'm open to change if there is scriptural evidence that God joins a true believer to a known unbeliever.

Also, concerning my viewpoint that I don't believe God honors an "unlawful" vow------in regards to second, third, etc marriages..........it's not only that point which leads me to my conclusions.   It's the fact that nowhere in NT scripture do I see where God dissolved/UNJOINED the previous union.   I see where people leave each other, get CIVIL divorces(become 'unmarried'), remarry (commit adultery against their lawful spouse), etc.............but I see no evidence that GOD joins the new unions.   I only see where He calls them sin........and THAT leads me to ask:   Does God join that which He calls SIN and prohibits?  Blessings in Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Carol on February 23, 2005, 12:22:25 PM
This is what I think we get into when we concentrate so much on the law, instead of the gospel, --just as the Pharisees did.  You can do this, but only if this applies or that exception occurs, but you can't do that, unless of course, you did something else first or followed up with that.  But if you get everything just right, --if you can figure it all out, then you're OK.   I don't believe so.  There is rest and forgiveness in our Saviour. 

Look to Christ, rest in him.  The Holy Spirit will lead us and teach us as we study his word and seek him with all our heart.  He will lead his people to do what he would have us to do.

My 2 cents,
Carol
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 23, 2005, 01:37:07 PM
Carol,

Paul said the scriptures are for "doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness;  that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."   The scriptures are what I base my understanding of what God joins and does not join.   That is all I have to trust as my own reasonings are not trustworthy----nor are the reasonings of other men/women.  That is why I ask for scriptural evidences to the contrary of what I now see.   I fully believe it is the Word of God through the Holy Spirit's revelation that one's mind is changed towards Truth.

Paul taught on marriage and how it is to be used.   Was Paul a "law keeper" or did he teach doctrines that were inspired by God?   In my opinion, Paul was an incredible teacher of God's grace, yet he taught that the bond between husband and wife would remain until death---despite any sin either would commit.   Who am I to say that Paul was wrong?   In Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 23, 2005, 02:48:11 PM
It's as simple as this. The law says don't divorce. The law says don't remarry if you do divorce unless it's to your previous spouse. What do we do if we have "already" divorced and married again? We confess our sin and we know that Christ has forgiven us. we don't divorce again. And we don't remarry again.

Now that was about four lines and is biblically sound. People "choose" to make things so complicated that it's like chinese arithmatic. God will forgive the sin of remarriage if we have become saved, and do not divorce again. Because divorcing again would not be making things right, and it would not be repentance, it would be continuing in our rebellion. Continuing in a secomd marriage is not continuing in sin.

http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=646.0


Let's not cover grace with ideas that aren't in the bible, such as the idea that no one is ever really divorced. That's a man made doctrine. Marriages vows are broken all the time, but we can thank God that there is one who can forgive us.

 James 4:6 "But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble."

Let's not be so proud that we cannot be humbled. Because this reminds me of Jonah who became angry when God said he would forgive Nineveh. For a moment he forgot that it was only by grace that he himself was saved. There is forgiveness with repentance. Breaking another marriage is as bad as breaking the first. So let's not place burdens we don't bear ourselves.




Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 23, 2005, 03:32:31 PM
God will forgive the sin of remarriage if we have become saved, and do not divorce again. Because divorcing again would not be making things right, and it would not be repentance, it would be continuing in our rebellion. Let's not cover grace with ideas that aren't in the bible, such as the idea that no one is ever really divorced. That's a man made doctrine. Marriages vows are broken all the time, but we can thank God that there is one who can forgive us.

 James 4:6 "But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble."

Let's not be so proud that we cannot be humbled. Because this reminds me of Jonah who became angry when God said he would forgive Ninevah. For a moment he forgot that it was only by grace that he himself was saved. There is forgiveness with repentance. Breaking another marriage is as bad as bereaking the first. So let's not place burdens we don't bear ourselves.

This has nothing to do with pride Reformer.  It has to do with Truth and approaching the Word of God with a heart desiring to walk in Truth and when speaking of His Word, rightly leading people instead of leading them astray.    As I said before, I DID used to believe remarriage was AOK with God----until I actually studied for myself.   I truly do not wish to see others "punished".   That is not my heart at all.   I wish to see the Body of Christ glorify Christ and be a witness of His power in this world.  It is also my desire to see the saints of God know His Word and flee from unrighteousness, so they will NOT suffer the effects of sin.   I personally know people who are suffering due to transgressing the commands of God in this area.   If they knew the Word of God -----that unbiblical remarriage=adultery, they would not be in the grievous situation they are presently in.

The fact remains that Paul in Rom. 7:2-3 shows a woman who has remarried (committing adultery), yet she is still "joined" to her 1st husband until he dies.   That is not Chinese arithmetic, nor is it "twisting" scripture on my part.   Paul is showing that neither divorce nor remarriage dissolves what God joined.   Paul shows the remarriage as a continual sin----an adulterous relationship.   These are not my words, they are his words/God's Words.   It's interesting to note that up until the last century----when divorce and remarriages skyrocketed----the Church overwhelmingly looked upon unbiblical remarriages as being in CONTINUAL sin.   Even the Christian Reformed Church used to teach this..........until 1956.........http://www.crcna.org/whoweare/beliefs/position_marriage.asp?WhoWeAreMenu   

<<<<<<<<<<The long-standing position of the CRC from 1908 on was that people who remarry after an unbiblical divorce are living in continual adultery. That position was elaborated on in 1947 but was not changed until 1956. That year synod stated that there was no scriptural evidence to support the thesis regarding continual adultery. >>>>>>>>>

My simple question is this:  Does God join that which He prohibits?    If homosexual marriages become legal, will God honor/join those too?   It all seems very hypocritical to me------adulterous "marriages" are ok, homosexual "marriages" are not?   To me, it seems the stamp of approval on remarriages, but the vigorous move against homosexual marriages is much like what Jesus spoke against when addressing the Pharisee's hypocrisy------they condemn the same things they do themselves..........we condemn one type of sexual sin, yet say God approves/even blesses another sexual sin.  I don't have a Pharisee mindset.   I am seeing the current trends in the Church and my mind cannot comprehend how it is that God's blessings are upon relationships HE calls sin---and that He joins these relationships.

I DO believe in repentance----fully and completely as I myself have received the Lord's forgiveness in many areas of my life.   However, this is what I do know about repentance------true repentance means forsaking the sin.   If you can show evidence scripturally that an adulterous relationship (remarriage) is JOINED by God and is now lawful before Him, then I would agree that confession in sorrow for a past marriage is true repentance.   Blessings in Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 23, 2005, 03:54:35 PM
The fact remains that Paul in Rom. 7:2-3 shows a woman who has remarried (committing adultery), yet she is still "joined" to her 1st husband until he dies.   That is not Chinese arithmetic, nor is it "twisting" scripture on my part. 

Cindy, repeating something three or four times does not make it anymore sound than the first time you said it. We all know that the law of marriage is to be until death do us part. That's not at issue with most of us. The issue is, what happens when that law is broken and that joined is separated, and the person has remarried till death do them part again. That's the only question relavent here. If marriage is a law that should be followed until death do them part, then they should not divorce the second spouse after they have learned of this law. Certainly not divorce them and go back and marry the first spouse again. And what if the first spouse is already married again? They should dump their current family as well? There is no biblical precedent to do such a thing. And just repeating the law that marriage was meant to be until death, doesn't change that fact. Tony has already given plenty of scripture showing a wife should not return to her first husband after she has been remarried, so I won't bother repeating it. It doesn't get any better after three times hearing it I can assure you.


Quote
I personally know people who are suffering due to transgressing the commands of God in this area.   If they knew the Word of God -----that unbiblical remarriage=adultery, they would not be in the grievous situation they are presently in.


If I said I personally knew people who, after they learned of their sin and repented of their divorce,  were blessed of God in a second marriage and are the most Godly people I know, would that change anything? No, it wouldn't. So neither your examples nor mine add anything to this debate. What we should seek after is what the Bible says about marriage, divorce and remarriage, and what it says about remarrying a spouse after you have remarried. I think the biblical facts stand on the side of not divorcing a first spouse, and not divorcing a second spouse. And I think I'm just as biblical a person as you are and seeking truth just as diligently as you.

We'll just have to disagree on this.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 23, 2005, 04:11:59 PM
 Even the Christian Reformed Church used to teach this..........until 1956.........

The long-standing position of the CRC from 1908 on was that people who remarry after an unbiblical divorce are living in continual adultery. That position was elaborated on in 1947 but was not changed until 1956. That year synod stated that there was no scriptural evidence to support the thesis regarding continual adultery.

Well at least they got one thing out of 5 right. That, "there was no scriptural evidence to support this thesis." That part is right as has been shown in this forum. But we can't go by Church tradition here. And even if we did, a measly 39 years from 08 to 47 hardly illustrates church tradition. You mean the Church took around 1908 years to figure out a person in remarriage was living in continual adultery? What did they believe before 1908 or did they even exist? And this belief of theirs only lasted from 1908 to 1947? You want us to accept this as biblical evidence for what? You see, you're not bringing anything but a few years of tradition. How about the bible?

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 23, 2005, 04:26:48 PM
The issue is, what happens when that law is broken and that joined is separated, and the person has remarried till death do them part again.


Paul addressed that too, but it seems to get ignored by most.  The woman broke the "law" of marriage and remarried, yet Paul states that as long as her husband (the 1st one) is alive, she will be called an adulteress.


If I said I personally knew people who, after they learned of their sin and repented of their divorce,  were blessed of God in a second marriage and are the most Godly people I know, would that change anything? No, it wouldn't. So neither your examples nor mine add anything to this debate. What we should seek after is what the Bible says about marriage, divorce and remarriage, and what it says about remarrying a spouse after you have remarried. I think the biblical facts stand on the side of not divorcing a first spouse, and not divorcing a second spouse.

I don't use the situation I spoke of to reaffirm my stance of no remarriage.   My point in telling of it is to show the importance of KNOWING the word of God concerning remarriage-----so one doesn't find themself in that position.   I agree with you concerning situational ethics.   There are many people in homosexual congregations who say particular homosexual couples are "living for God and their lives are a reflection of God's blessings being upon them".............I think we can agree that what we "see" does not always reflect whether God's approval is truly upon their relationship.   In Him, Cindy

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 23, 2005, 05:10:46 PM
 Well at least they got one thing out of 5 right. That, "there was no scriptural evidence to support this thesis." That part is right as has been shown in this forum. But we can't go by Church tradition here. And even if we did, a measly 39 years from 08 to 47 hardly illustrates church tradition. You mean the Church took around 1908 years to figure out a person in remarriage was living in continual adultery? What did they believe before 1908 or did they even exist? And this belief of theirs only lasted from 1908 to 1947? You want us to accept this as biblical evidence for what? You see, you're not bringing anything but a few years of tradition. How about the bible?


No, that was not presented as biblical evidence.   I've already presented much biblical evidence as to why I now see marriage in such a light.   That was merely one instance of a church which previously viewed remarriage as continual adultery.   There is MUCH evidence that the early church, Roman Catholics and many others viewed the original marriage bond as indissolvable(not figureatively, but literally) ...........http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/135/46.0.html
This is surely an issue which divides many in the church today, especially since it has become such an enormous problem.    Noone wants to "touch it".............including most pastors.   I can't change peoples minds either, but I can encourage them to get into the Word of God and test how the scriptures are being applied.   And as far as Deut. 24 being applied as you say, it does not fit.    It is not apples to apples.  And as you said, saying it 3 or more times does not make it so.   The woman in Deut 24 is given permission to remarry----she does not commit adultery.   Not even close to the NT passages which teach remarriage=adultery.   Blessings in Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 23, 2005, 06:25:07 PM
Quote
You see, you're not bringing anything but a few years of tradition. How about the bible?

No, that was not presented as biblical evidence.   I've already presented much biblical evidence as to why I now see marriage in such a light.   That was merely one instance of a church which previously viewed remarriage as continual adultery.   There is MUCH evidence that the early church, Roman Catholics and many others viewed the original marriage bond as indissolvable(not figureatively, but literally)
  Blessings in Him, Cindy

I say church tradition is not the authority and you agreed. Then you present more evidence of church tradition, starting with the Roman Catholic Church, of all institutions.  :o  :o  :o

I don't think you get it. The bible is the authority of divorce and remarriage, not Roman Catholic Church traditions. I repeat what I said in my last post. You're not bringing anything but years of tradition. How about the bible?

 Romans 3:4 "God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."

We cast off the unbiblical traditions of the Roman Catholic Church years ago. And you want to hold them up as an example? That's going from bad to worse. Just saying we are in continual adultery if we have remarried doesn't prove anything. And if such a doctrine was true, then King David would have been in continual adultery for marrying other wives. But no matter what we say about these legitimate other wives, you just don't seem to understand the contradiction your doctrine presents to the idea that second marriages are invalid. If having a second wife was not valid, then all these prophets and saints with multiple wives lived in continual adultery because they didn't stick with the one flesh theory. Yet God never mentions this living in continual adultery. At best He says they sinned in multiplying wives. No mention of this idea they were only wed to the first wife. That's evidence enough for me.

 Romans 4:6,7 "Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered."

David sinned, and his sins were forgiven. Did God speak of David as a man in continual adultery, or a continual murderer just because he remarried and murdered? No, even though David married again and again sinfully, they were all his legitimate wives. Nothing has changed in God's law where a second wife is not still a wife. How does your understanding of the one flesh doctrine sit with those believers with multiple wives? Did that make all the second and third wives whores and adulterers? No it didn't at all. Should they all have been abandoned because you think only one marriage really counts?  No they shouldn't. And the reason is because a second marriage is valid, even if it was an act of sin and adultery. It's not a continuing sin, marriage is one act, lawful or unlawful. If God has paid the price for man's disobedience (as with david) then he is forgiven. We cannot pretend like a marriage, other children, years of life with a new wife has never taken place, and just uproot and go back to the first wife as if that fixes everything. Not that these evidences in scripture will prove anything to you, but they do show your inconsistency.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Gilda on February 24, 2005, 04:24:22 AM
Cindy,
  From the scriptures I don't see that remarriage is a state of continual adultery, it is the act of adulterating a marriage. There is a difference between terms. You may be right about no divoce being a,llowed, I don't know, but I do know that you are not right about women leaving their current families to return to a first husband.

I don't think that youu really recognize divorce. By Jesus Christ speaking of those who divorce, this means that marriages can be put asunder or separated, even in Godís eyes. But because God instituted marriage as a lifelong bond, God sees remarriage to another is an act of adultery. It's an unlawful act or offense to the first husband. Where I think your misunderstanding comes in is when you hold to the belief that a second marriage is to be ignored. The problem I have with this is that nowhere in scripture does God say a second marriage is to be treated as if it didn't exist. And the church has stated that we cannot form doctrines from silence. If the bible doesn't say it, we shouldn't say it either.

 Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

I am subject to my husband. I would have a very hard time believing that God wanted me to leave my husband and kids to return to my previous husband, who has another wife and kids. Or to take my kids from this husband to go live with my old husband. Or any other number of horrible options. I think that you've missed something here, and it's called the grace of God in forgiveness for our mistakes as long as as we confess them and turn away from ever doing that again.

 Joh 7:23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?
 24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Gilda on February 24, 2005, 04:37:21 AM
Paul addressed that too, but it seems to get ignored by most.  The woman broke the "law" of marriage and remarried, yet Paul states that as long as her husband (the 1st one) is alive, she will be called an adulteress.

No, it doesn't say that. That is your interpretation of the verse.

 Ro 7:2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Yes, the woman who marries again while her husband is alive is called an adulteresss. Because it's unlawful to marry another man. Just as the man who murders is called a murderer. But if he becomes saved, that sin is forgiven. So it's not what you read that causes you to misinterpret it, it's the way you read it. As if she is continually all her life in adultery, as if she's not remarried and forgiven if she became a Christian.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 24, 2005, 01:32:17 PM
No, it doesn't say that. That is your interpretation of the verse.

 Ro 7:2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Yes, the woman who marries again while her husband is alive is called an adulteresss. Because it's unlawful to marry another man. Just as the man who murders is called a murderer. But if he becomes saved, that sin is forgiven. So it's not what you read that causes you to misinterpret it, it's the way you read it. As if she is continually all her life in adultery, as if she's not remarried and forgiven if she became a Christian.

Guilda, I dont' mean to be argumentative as I can't see this passage right now any different than I do.  Every translation I have found basically states the same thing:   the bond is broken with death.   As long as the husband lives, if she lives/marries another man she will be called an adulteress.

Paul used marriage and the end of it(through death) as the perfect analogy to Jesus and the Law-----freedom from the law coming only through Jesus.  So it is spoken concerning the bond of marriage----death is the only vehicle to gain freedom.   If freedom was gained through divorce, gained through adultery, gained through remarriage, then Paul's analogy falls apart and it is not a true analogy.   Freedom from the law then could be argued by some to come through some other means than Christ----good deeds, etc.   We know that is not true.   Paul used remarriage/adultery in his analogy, yet what did he say dissolved the bond of marriage?   Death.   If I am wrong, pray for me, but right now, there has not been scriptural evidence shown me WHEN the bond is dissolved by GOD of the original marriage covenant, if it is not through death alone.  Some say at the first act of adultery God dissolves the bond, some say when someone divorces then God dissolves the bond, some say the entrance into a second marriage dissolves the bond of the previous union.   Which is it?    That's a good question and one people should be solidified in scripturally if they are to hold any specific position on this issue.   As I said, all I can see is that Jesus and Paul both spoke of a remarriage as adultery.   Concerning repentance, typically if someone is in adultery, repentance would require forsaking the sin.   I just don't see from a scriptural standpoint how a sin turns into a non-sin-----how a relationship God says is sin, is not sin when it is remained in.   That doesn't work with an extramarital affair (adultery), a homosexual relationship, a premarital sexual relationship, etc.  Why is a remarriage which Jesus and Paul both termed adultery (having unlawful relations with someone not your spouse), different?

I have said this many times in Truth, I do NOT WANT to hold this position, as the "popular" position is much more comfortable to hold and I will be more well-liked holding it, yet...................until the Holy Spirit shows me differently, I cannot change what I currently see.........so for those who would get mad at me or irritated, if you believe me wrong, pray for me and pray for yourselves that if you are wrong the Lord would open your eyes as well..........Blessings in Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: cindyw on February 24, 2005, 01:52:03 PM
I say church tradition is not the authority and you agreed. Then you present more evidence of church tradition, starting with the Roman Catholic Church, of all institutions.  :o  :o  :o

I don't think you get it. The bible is the authority of divorce and remarriage, not Roman Catholic Church traditions. I repeat what I said in my last post. You're not bringing anything but years of tradition. How about the bible?

The RCC's name was INCLUDED in what I wrote.   I do not rely upon their teachings as Truth.   However, the RCC CONTINUED what was being practiced in the earliest church practices written about in the Antenicene Father's writings----written well before the establishment of the RCC.

We cast off the unbiblical traditions of the Roman Catholic Church years ago. And you want to hold them up as an example? That's going from bad to worse. Just saying we are in continual adultery if we have remarried doesn't prove anything.

I never "just say".   I have provided quite alot of scripture as to why I believe as I do.  We just disagree on what the scriptures mean.


And if such a doctrine was true, then King David would have been in continual adultery for marrying other wives. But no matter what we say about these legitimate other wives, you just don't seem to understand the contradiction your doctrine presents to the idea that second marriages are invalid. If having a second wife was not valid, then all these prophets and saints with multiple wives lived in continual adultery because they didn't stick with the one flesh theory. Yet God never mentions this living in continual adultery. At best He says they sinned in multiplying wives. No mention of this idea they were only wed to the first wife. That's evidence enough for me.

Do you ever see anywhere in the OT where a man when marrying multiple wives committed adultery doing such?   This is not the case with Jesus' and Paul's teachings.   They labelled remarriages after divorce as adultery against the first wife.    Since you bring up OT practice, do you believe those who are in the present day Christian polygamy camp are correct, since they do believe and practice having multiple wives?  They do not divorce their covenant wives, they just add more wives.

Concerning your last statement which I didn't quote, I will ask you:   if the "act" of remarriage itself is adultery (unlawful relations with someone who is not the spouse), when does this person who is not the spouse become the spouse?   At what point do we punch through the sin gauntlet and it become lawful and "joined" by God?   What if the people involved are NEVER sorry they ended their previous marriage and committed adultery through a remarriage?   Have they truly repented?   I know you think I think way too deeply on this and make it more difficult than it is, but these are questions really that should be answered if we are to be able to counsel wisely according to the Word of God and not our own "reasonings".........Blessings in Him, Cindy
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on March 12, 2005, 04:42:10 AM
Concerning your last statement which I didn't quote, I will ask you:   if the "act" of remarriage itself is adultery (unlawful relations with someone who is not the spouse), when does this person who is not the spouse become the spouse?   

A person becomes a spouse when they are married. It doesn't matter if the marriage was unlawful or not, they were still married and that "fact" cannot be changed by divorce. As I've said ten times, multiple marriages were common, and God recognized all of them, not just the first one.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: 4christ on July 29, 2007, 01:38:41 PM
In both Matthew and Mark the Pharisees come to Jesus and test him by  asking him whether it is lawful for a man to divorce his wife. They evidently have in mind the passage in Deuteronomy 24:1 which simply describes divorce as a fact rather than giving any legislation in favor of it. They wonder how Jesus will take a position with regard to this passage.
  3.2 Jesus' answer is, "For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives" (Mt. 19:8).
  3.3 But then Jesus criticizes the Pharisees' failure to recognize in the books of Moses God's deepest and original intention for marriage. So he quotes two passages from Genesis. "God made them male and female. ...For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh" (Genesis 1:27; 2:24).
  3.4 From these passages in Genesis Jesus concludes, "So they are no longer two, but one." And then he makes his climaxing statement, "What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder."
  3.5 The implication is that Jesus rejects the Pharisees' use of Deuteronomy 24:1 and raises the standard of marriage for his disciples to God's original intention in creation. He says that none of us should try to undo the "one-flesh" relationship which God has united.
  3.6 Before we jump to the conclusion that this absolute statement should be qualified in view of the exception clause ("except for unchastity") mentioned in Matthew 19:9, we should seriously entertain the possibility that the exception clause in Matthew 19:9 should be understood in the light of the absolute statement of Matthew 19:6, ("let no man put asunder") especially since the verses that follow this conversation with the Pharisees in Mark 10 do not contain any exception when they condemn remarriage.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Messenger on July 30, 2007, 07:10:35 AM
Quote
3.5 The implication is that Jesus rejects the Pharisees' use of Deuteronomy 24:1 and raises the standard of marriage for his disciples to God's original intention in creation. He says that none of us should try to undo the "one-flesh" relationship which God has united.
  3.6 Before we jump to the conclusion that this absolute statement should be qualified in view of the exception clause ("except for unchastity") mentioned in Matthew 19:9, we should seriously entertain the possibility that the exception clause in Matthew 19:9 should be understood in the light of the absolute statement of Matthew 19:6, ("let no man put asunder") especially since the verses that follow this conversation with the Pharisees in Mark 10 do not contain any exception when they condemn remarriage.

The divorce command given was not for a man to put away his wife it was so that God could divorce the external congregation for her apostasy and also reveal His unconditional marraige with the New covenant believers which are a part of the heavenly Jerusalem.

Mt 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Eph 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
 28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
 30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
[/color]

Paul reiterated God's command in 1Co 7:10 ∂ And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

The law to divorce was given becoz of the hardness of unsaved man's heart Mt 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

But spiritully we understand that only He who has not committed adultery or fornication has the right to throw the first stone. All men are sinners and therefore none can claim to be sineless to throw the first stone at an adulteress and hence comes under the same law.

Only Christ who is holy and sinless has the right to put away the adulteress and punish her for her sins and hence is justified when He divorces the external congregation.

Joh 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

Messenger
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: stelsewhere@handih on August 16, 2007, 06:44:46 AM
Yes it is ... for only 2 Just Causes:
1) Unfaithfulness...adultery... when a truly saved person...can forgive a cheating spouse...but just can't get past the hurt and betrayal:

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

Mat 19:9  And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

One may very well be truly saved and blood washed...but after being made a fool of by an unfaithful spouse... not everyone has sufficient grace to put that humiliation aside ...and continue in the marriage...and if they are not able to ...they are not bound by God...to stay in that marriage...when one can forgive...but is hurt much too deep to forget...the wounded spouse is free to divorce and remarry..should they choose to....and there would be no condemnation before the True and Living God.

2) In the case of one being married to an unbeliever...

1Cr 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

1Cr 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

   1Cr 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

   1Cr 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such [cases]: but God hath called us to peace.

So divorce is allowed...but not just because of irreconcilable differences ...There must be Just Cause ..before the True and Living God...He will know the real truth of the matter...have you done all to save the marriage...the home...the family?...Whereas abuse is covered under...Does a true believer abuse their spouse physically or mentally? No everyone who says LORD, LORD...is known of Him 8)


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on August 16, 2007, 02:57:34 PM
Yes it is ... for only 2 Just Causes:
1) Unfaithfulness...adultery... when a truly saved person...can forgive a cheating spouse...but just can't get past the hurt and betrayal:


 Hmmmmmmm! I don't read that anywhere in scripture. Must be in another Bible than the one I read.


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

Wrong!  Jesus already dealt with divorce when talking to the people in Matthew 19. In the old testament it was allowed as a type of God and Israel, because of the hardness of their heart, but it was not to be so. There is a one flesh covenant in marriage that was always supposed to be, from the beginning. If the bible is our authority.


Quote

2) In the case of one being married to an unbeliever...

1Cr 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.


Nope! No divorce here either. Nothing in these passages says that anyone can divorce, although the Church continues to preach that it does.

 Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Sosthenes on August 19, 2007, 04:39:21 PM
Rich,

Keep your bride! Work with her with a good pastor and good godly women in a sound church. When the Lord spoke of fornication in Matthew, He was referring to porneia or sex outside of marriage(before marriage). He then made it clear that there were to be no divorce under the kingdom of heaven. Later on Paul in 1 Cor 7 used the term porneias meaning all forms of sexual sins. The teaching of the Lord is clear. No divorce save fornication.
Live with your wife in peace as best you can. You are to accept your condition as the Lord saw fit to give you. Clear your mind of all the negative thoughts and focus on a positive future.

Peace to you both.
Sosthenes
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformed2005 on March 02, 2008, 11:35:49 PM
I have been thoroughly convinced through a healthy reading of scripture (specifically Matthew 19), that divorce is never allowable...not even for matters of divorce.

 In Matthew 19:8, in response to the Pharisees questioning Him if divorce is allowed in cases of adultery, Jesus replies the following:

  - "He said unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your heart suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

I accredit the following to a paraphrasing of Tony Warren (as well as my own amazed insight, after FINALLY reading the passage very slowly!), who wrote an article entitled "Divorce and Remarriage: The Authority of Scripture!".  It is available here:

http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/divorce.shtml

We know that God gives to us a heart of flesh, and removes our heart of stone.  Therefore, we are not to have the hardness of heart problem.  Of course, we do sin, and do fall, and do break God's law quite often; but we are thankfully forgiven through His abiding love and unending mercy and grace! 

But, since we are no longer to have the hardness of heart, then divorce, EVEN FOR ADULTERY, is not allowed (mind-blowing, but really, read the article...read the passage from scripture...there is no other conclusion to come to).

So, my question is this: what of a person that was divorced and then re-married?  If he or she came to this understanding of the text, and committed both sins while a believer, what is he/she to do?  Obviously, repent, but then what?

If the marriage was forever, then the new marriage is wrong.  Repenting clears the old sin, but not new.  And, any lying together is therefore new fornication.  And, therefore, new sin!

I am thankful that I am not in this position...but I am sure that many are.  What are God-fearing, Christ-loving, Spirit-filled Christians to do!?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Stan Pat on April 09, 2008, 10:51:23 AM


 I also have come to the conclusion that any divorce for any reason is sin. And I must admit, I wondered about this question you raise also. I wonder if Tony Warren can answer this if he is not too busy.  As it pertains to his article and is a legitimate question I'm sure many would like to hear his view on. Since I have great respect for his thorough study of such questions, I would appreciate his view on what is the biblical position.  Thanks!

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on April 11, 2008, 09:09:22 AM
Quote
>>>
I also have come to the conclusion that any divorce for any reason is sin. And I must admit, I wondered about this question you raise also. I wonder if Tony Warren can answer this if he is not too busy.  As it pertains to his article and is a legitimate question I'm sure many would like to hear his view on. Since I have great respect for his thorough study of such questions, I would appreciate his view on what is the biblical position.  Thanks!
<<<

Hi Stan Pat,
 Thanks for your kind words. Actually my view is that some Christians confuse God's command that the marriage covenant be as an unbreakable bond, with it actually being an unbreakable bond. In other words, God's command to be as one flesh, with actually being one flesh. The marriage covenant is a oath or promise of unity. But the definition of divorce is the sin of breaking that marriage covenant. It is what God warned against. The "pulling asunder" of what God hath joined together.

Matthew 19:5-6

Some Christians act as if marriage very literally makes two people one flesh, when that language is descriptive of how the two should consider themselves. God is not warning against pulling asunder something that could not be pulled asunder. Rather God is forbidding the pulling apart of what has by oath or promise before God, been joined together. He is saying you cannot lawfully break that covenant you made. However, you can break that covenant (like any other) unlawfully.


Quote
>>>
Reformed2005: 
...But, since we are no longer to have the hardness of heart, then divorce, EVEN FOR ADULTERY, is not allowed (mind-blowing, but really, read the article...read the passage from scripture...there is no other conclusion to come to).
<<<

I agree. There is no other conclusion to come to LAWFULLY if we accept God's command that what is joined together before God, must not be pulled apart. The problem is, man has always rationalized breaking God's laws with some spurious exception when it suits his own purposes.
 

Quote
>>>
So, my question is this: what of a person that was divorced and then re-married? 
<<<

Then the person has put away his wife or her husband in violation of God's law. He/she has committed the act of pulling asunder what has been joined together before God. It was a sin, but as you said, we do sin and do break God's law quite often. As "true" Christians, we are thankfully forgiven through His abiding love and unending mercy and grace. Just as David was forgiven for his act of the transgression of murder. There are a few different options. 1. If a person was divorced and then re-married, and then became a Christian, those two sins were forgiven. 2. If a person was already a true Christian, divorced and then re-married through ignorance, then those two sins were totally forgiven. On the other hand, if a person was merely a professing Christian, but unwashed, and yet connived to think that he/she could tempt God by divorcing and re-marring and then plotting to ask for forgiveness (circumventing God's command), then I doubt that he or she even has the slightest idea of who Christ is. There is most probably no forgiveness for such deliberate serpentine cleverness and connivery.

Matthew 4:6-7

Make no mistake, it is Satan that deceives people into tempting the Lord God in their actions. There are those professing Christians who think that they can sin freely, and then afterward simply ask forgiveness, and everything is fine. But God is not mocked. This is tempting the Lord God, and He is not obligated to have mercy upon anyone but the Elect. And not obligated to assure that the non elect aren't deceived, thinking that they are elect. For the true elect have a changed heart.


Quote
>>>
...If he or she came to this understanding of the text, and committed both sins while a believer, what is he/she to do?  Obviously, repent, but then what?
<<<

If one sinned by divorce and remarriage, and then came to understand it was wrong, they simply confess their sins (1st John 1:9-10), ask for forgiveness, and then be assured that their sin is forgiven. What they should never do is deny that it was sin, or rationalize their actions because of situation, or blame it on a husband/wife's actions. Repentance brings forgiveness. If one does not truly repent, then he really feels he has done nothing for which he needs forgiveness. But if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Psalms 103:10-12

As true believers, the Lord God doesn't deal with us according to our sins or transgressions, as they have already been paid for. We are not rewarded according to our iniquities, else none of us would be saved. We have and advocate with the father, Christ (1st John 2:1) who has redeemed us from all sin.


Quote
>>>
If the marriage was forever, then the new marriage is wrong
<<<

From the beginning, the marriage oath or covenant was supposed to be forever. But the marriage obviously was not forever, since there was the transgression of putting away, or divorce. That is the breaking of the marriage covenant, just as has been done ever since the marriage institution was established by God. As I said, I think some people misinterpret or misunderstand God's command that we not pull apart or break the marriage covenant, with an idea that such an action is in fact impossible. These are two different things. Covenant breaking is done by man all the time. It is only God who will never break a Covenant, because He alone is faithful and true. We have to understand, the marriage covenant is unbreakable ONLY in the sense that it cannot be righteously broken, not in the sense that it's impossible to break.

Mark 10:11-12

Clearly God understands that a marriage covenant can be broken, and the unlawful action of putting away can be taken. As indeed the act of remarriage can be taken, and it also is an act of sin. Yet God doesn't say it is not a real divorce, or that it is not a real second marriage, indeed He labels it a marriage. A divorce and a remarriage. God could have very easily said that a divorce is not valid, but far from it. God could have easily said that a remarriage is not really a marriage, but He didn't because it's not true. It is a marriage, though it was unlawful to undertake under these circumstances. Indeed there are many cases of Christians with multiple wives, and every one of them was a wife in God's eyes. Not just the first, but "every" one of them were wives. And this proves that this idea that a second marriage is invalid, is in fact in error. A prime example is Jacob marrying Leah, and then marrying Rachel. No matter how the marriages were entered into, they were still valid marriages and both were his wives before God.

Genesis 29:28

Does God say Rachel cannot be his lawful wife because he was married to Leah first? No, because though Rachel was the second wife, she was still his wife. Even though from the beginning God intended a man and one wife. That didn't change this "Biblical" fact. A second marriage is in fact a wife and that second marriage cannot be lawfully broken anymore than the first one could.

So when you say "If the marriage was forever, then the new marriage is wrong," that is not the case. Sure, the first marriage was "supposed" to be forever, from the beginning God had designed that, but man is a sinful creature. Yes, divorce was wrong and causes adultery. Yes, the second marriage was wrong. But that doesn't mean that the second marriage was not a marriage. Not anymore than Jacob's first marrying Leah, meant that his later marrying of the younger sister Rachel was not a real marriage. It WAS a real marriage and she his actual wife. Likewise, any second marriage of any Christian is a valid marriage, though it was sin for them to do.


Quote
>>>
Repenting clears the old sin, but not new.
<<<

There is no new or rather "continuing" sin. There is man committing the act or sin of divorce, and there is committing the act or sin of remarriage. These are not continuing sins. They are acts that have taken place in time past that break the covenant or promise. And once these acts are forgiven by God, they are removed from us as far away as east is to west, never to be accounted of again.

1st John 3:5-6

In Christ the sin of Divorce or the sin of a remarriage is forgiven, thus there is no sin.


Quote
>>>
And, any lying together is therefore new fornication.  And, therefore, new sin!
<<<

But laying together with someone who is your actual husband or wife, even a second husband or wife, once forgiven for the sin of remarriage, is not a continuing sin. Thus it is not new fornication, it is a consummation of a marriage bed.



Quote
>>>
I am thankful that I am not in this position...but I am sure that many are.  What are God-fearing, Christ-loving, Spirit-filled Christians to do!?
<<<

First, what they cannot do is to go back to their first husband or wife. Though some Christians teach this, this would be "confusion" and an abomination in God's eyes. Once someone has jumped to another man or woman, they cannot return to their first husband or wife. That would make a mockery out of righteousness. Indeed God outlines this law against such debauchery and game playing in the laws for Israel.

Deuteronomy 24:2-4

So those who claim that a wife (or husband) should go back to their original spouses because there was never a real second marriage, are not really reading the Bible assiduously. There was indeed a divorce from the covenant marriage, and there was indeed a remarriage. And neither may not go back to the original spouse because that is sexual and spiritual confusion, an abomination unto God! they are to remain in their current marriage and never contemplate the sin of divorce and remarriage again.

Of course we know unbelievers and pseudo-Christians will ultimately do whatever they want, but the true believer should simply start anew in repentance and faith knowing that his previous sins are removed from him/her. Hope that answers your questions a little.


nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Dana Pescator on April 11, 2008, 12:41:55 PM
Tony, I thought that was what Christians should do also. To stay with their present husbands or wives seems the biblical thing to do. But I didn't know the biblical basis, so I kept quiet. I agree that you cannot go back to your old husband unless both you and your previous spouse have never remarried. Correct?

I have a related question for the group. If the husband remarries, but the wife remains single, is the husband still obligated to take care of the first wife financially?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Chris on April 14, 2008, 04:13:38 PM
I have a related question for the group. If the husband remarries, but the wife remains single, is the husband still obligated to take care of the first wife financially?


 Yes, because a husband can have multiple wives and must take care of all of them. But if the wife divorces and remarries, then her new husband takes over that task of providing for her. And if he doesn't he is worse than an infidel scripture says.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Rose on March 28, 2009, 03:35:44 PM
Tony, Chris, Reformer, troglodytes, shovenists, et el,
  As usual with me and you guys, we are at odds with what Christianity is. For me its love, and with you "men" its law. But for you to dogmatically say we cannot divorce and remarry is the pinnacle of your puritanical arrogance. If a husband beats his wife, you are playing god and saying she can't divorce him and find another husband? You're crazy. The husband is to respect the wife as an equal partner, or else., Even God says that. Don't be bitter against them. Why don't you talk about that?

 Colossians 3:19
  "Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them".
 
 And what if the husband is bitter? The wife has the right to christian liberty where she can go and find a god loving husband. She can't stay with the devil. But you guys would bring back women treated as cattle. We have rights too. And one of them is the right to not be beaten by a husband and stay married. If you don't think so, you're crazy! Divorce is allowed in this case or even for monetary reasons or for desertion and cruelty.  Hundreds of Ministers will tell you that. You guys are in your own small little world.

And for your information, when it says one flesh, it simply means that she is equal to him, not that they are not two people.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Nikki on March 29, 2009, 09:00:13 AM
Tony, Chris, Reformer, troglodytes, shovenists, et el,

You are making a false assumption that only men are against divorce and remarriage. I can assure you that you are wrong. Being faithful crosses all gender lines. We are against divorce and remarriage because God hates it. It is just as simple as that. All these troglodytes and shovenists comments just shows how you cannot answer the scriptures that are used so you call names.


Quote
  As usual with me and you guys, we are at odds with what Christianity is.

From what I read, you are at odds with the girls here as well. Gender has nothing to do with it. as for someone beating his wife, we have laws against that. Divorce has nothing to do with that. maybe if some of these stupid women would actually get to know these criminals before they marry them, they wouldn't be married to wife beaters.

Quote
But for you to dogmatically say we cannot divorce and remarry is the pinnacle of your puritanical arrogance.

Actually, it is the pinnacle of being a faithful witness.

 "The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord".  1 Cor. 7:39

That's not being arrogant, that's being faithful. Some things Christians must be dogmatic about, and routinely breaking the marriage covenant is one of those things we need to address.


Quote
Colossians 3:19
  "Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them".
 
 And what if the husband is bitter? The wife has the right to christian liberty where she can go and find a god loving husband.

 This is not Christian liberty, it is bondage to sin.

 "Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin".  Romans 6:6


Quote
And for your information, when it says one flesh, it simply means that she is equal to him, not that they are not two people.

 Well that's a new one.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Northeast on April 19, 2009, 06:37:54 PM
Quote
maybe if some of these stupid women would actually get to know these criminals before they marry them, they wouldn't be married to wife beaters.

I am staggered that anyone calling themselves Christian could come out with a comment like that...shame.


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Halle on June 04, 2009, 04:09:15 AM
Quote
maybe if some of these stupid women would actually get to know these criminals before they marry them, they wouldn't be married to wife beaters.

I am staggered that anyone calling themselves Christian could come out with a comment like that...shame.




I admit that this may have been indelicately put, but I think that this person's point is that people today jump into marriage too quickly and have no thought for its lifetime bond. So I think that if not only women, but men also would spend more time getting to know each other instead of sleeping with each other, then maybe the divorce rate would drop tremendously.

I have another question for the forum. I was told by a Christian woman that a marriage is between the two people and if it wasn't done in a Church, it is not a legitimate marriage. I know this is not correct, but does anyone know how? In other words, how would I reply to that? Thanks.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Penne on June 04, 2009, 10:04:02 AM
I suspect your friend is trying to find a loop hole out of marriage either for herself or someone she loves.   With her kind of logic Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, and others were shacked up.  My husband and I were married in a court house by a judge.  I know Iím married.  I made a commitment and vows that are honored by God and He expects me to honor them too.
I know a woman right now who is going through a divorce and thinks itís alright in Godís eyes because her husband was married before her.  I also know a family of brothers with children scattered here and there because their mom, professed christian,  taught them itís ok to have sex with different women along as youíre not married.  Donít ask me the logic in that because I simply donít understand it either. 
The fact is God isnít stupid and He isnít fooled.   It doesnít matter where the ceremony takes place. A marriage in a courthouse, church or on the beach by a minister is still a marriage and God recognizes it as such.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: beelsls on June 04, 2009, 11:18:50 AM
I believe that God tells us that He guides and directs the lives of His elect all thru His Word. Like the 23rd Psalm.

Ps 23:1
∂ A Psalm of David. The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
Ps 23:2
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
Ps 23:3
He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
Ps 23:4
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Ps 23:5
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
Ps 23:6
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.

If God directs each step of His elects life then their will be no confusion concerning divorce.

I also find it interesting that Aberham while the husband of Sarah, had a child Ishmael with Hagar that God did not recognize as Aberhams son.

Ge 22:1
∂ And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.
Ge 22:2
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

God teaches in His word that the churches started falling away almost immidiately.

Ga 1:6
∂ I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Ga 1:7
Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

The Bible says that what God has joined together. It dosn't say what the church or man has joined together.

Mr 10:9
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Moses allowed divorce for the hard hearted and we know that when someone is saved God changes there heart.

Mt 19:7
They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
Mt 19:8
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

I think the question of divorce is a big deal for those who are called and a non issue for those who are chosen.

His Will Be Done
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on October 14, 2009, 03:22:00 PM
Hello,

Does anyone here know who Chuck Crismier is? He wrote something about marriage, divorce and remarriage.  I could not hear his video but does his teaching biblically or similiar to Tony Warren's divorce and remarriage study?

http://revver.com/video/916533/is-divorce-remarriage-biblical-chuck-crismier-viewpoint (http://revver.com/video/916533/is-divorce-remarriage-biblical-chuck-crismier-viewpoint)

Erik
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Melanie on March 15, 2010, 10:39:13 AM
Mr 10:9
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Moses allowed divorce for the hard hearted and we know that when someone is saved God changes there heart.

I think the question of divorce is a big deal for those who are called and a non issue for those who are chosen.

His Will Be Done

 I think in the sense that divorce is out of the question for faithful believers, it is a non issue for the elect.

 Psalms 40:8-9 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.
  I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O LORD, thou knowest.

 It is an issue for many Church members who do not have a changed heart because they don't like that particular law and think it unfair.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Betty on March 15, 2010, 10:09:43 PM

 I think in the sense that divorce is out of the question for faithful believers, it is a non issue for the elect.


What are you, a parrot? How presumptuous and arrogant. I consider myself a faithful Christian, and I believe that there are times when divorce is permitted. And even though I am not Reformed, even they got divorce right. So I guess according to you, they were wrong too? How totally arrogant!
I recommend Christians get and read

Not Under Bondage: Biblical Divorce for Abuse, Adultery & Desertion
Barbara Marshall. Ballarat: Maschil Press, 2008. 190pp including notes, bibliography and appendices. Barbara Roberts is the survivor of an abusive marriage, which she finally left by divorce after 10 years.

 
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Penne on March 16, 2010, 08:38:37 AM

I recommend Christians get and read

Not Under Bondage: Biblical Divorce for Abuse, Adultery & Desertion
Barbara Marshall. Ballarat: Maschil Press, 2008. 190pp including notes, bibliography and appendices. Barbara Roberts is the survivor of an abusive marriage, which she finally left by divorce after 10 years.

 


I have a book suggestion for you, itís called the Bible.

Matthew 19:4-6   "And He answered and said unto them, have ye not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female,   And said, for this reason shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they two shall be One Flesh Wherefore they are no more two, but one flesh. What Therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

My mother was in an abusive relationship to my dad for at least 17 years of their marriage.  Not only was it abusive but my dad was also unfaithful on a regular basis.  I asked Mom repeatedly, when I was a teen, why didnít she leave him.  My mother told me she meant to keep her vows even if he didnít.  She said God expected her to honor her marriage even if my dad didnít.  In her mind it was clear, her relationship with God meant more to her than what my dad had to offer.  It was a holy matrimony that no man would put asunder.  She demonstrated Godly love, not self love.  She was a witness to Godís truths, which is love.  My dad eventually repented of his sins.  They now have a wonderful marriage.  I know not all marriages end up as well as my parents, but nonetheless my mother displayed her love for biblical truth.


There are many terrible things that happen to us through out our lifetime.  Some people are in bad marriages.  Others are poor.  Still, others end up with a handicap that makes life much harder.  None of these things or any other give us an excuse to sin just to improve our lifestyles.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on March 16, 2010, 09:15:15 AM
I have a book suggestion for you, itís called the Bible.

Matthew 19:4-6

My mother was in an abusive relationship to my dad for at least 17 years of their marriage.  Not only was it abusive but my dad was also unfaithful on a regular basis.  I asked Mom repeatedly, when I was a teen, why didnít she leave him.  My mother told me she meant to keep her vows even if he didnít.  She said God expected her to honor her marriage even if my dad didnít.  In her mind it was clear, her relationship with God meant more to her than what my dad had to offer.  It was a holy matrimony that no man would put asunder.  She demonstrated Godly love, not self love.  She was a witness to Godís truths, which is love.  My dad eventually repented of his sins.  They now have a wonderful marriage.  I know not all marriages end up as well as my parents, but nonetheless my mother displayed her love for biblical truth.


 All I can add is Amen and Amen! God bless your Mother!

That's the way the Church use to be also, and use to advise.

 Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

The way they advise today is after the rudiments of the world, to read authors, to find loopholes and to do what they think is right. These more faithful people of old are getting harder and harder to find.   :'(




Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Pamela on March 16, 2010, 09:55:15 AM
I was blessed by your mother's testimony Penne, thanks.

And I believe that this is what He has called us all to do, for HIS sake! 


God bless,
Pam
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: ccrider on June 10, 2010, 02:01:19 PM
To be brief, I am wrestling with an issue.  I have not always been a child of light.  Christ saved me 15 years ago, so prior to that I was obviously wrought in sin. 
In specific, I have had relations with scores of women.  I have obstained from fornication for the same period, and have done so due to the gift of faith and God's preservation.  My quandry is in reference to the Samaritan woman at the well.  Did Christ prophetically see how many men she had fornicated with or how many men she had actually married?  The reason this perplexes me is my concern for biblical obedience.  If He referred to marriage, then I, myself have never been married and see this as possible proof of my ability to marry as a Christian.  However, if He was referring to fornication, then it may be a reality that I cannot ever be married, since the first person I slept with was my true wife and relations with everyone following was adultery.  With a new Christian wife, would I cause her and myself to commit adultery over and over - a constant state of adultery.  I am one who believes in NO justification for divorce, not even for adultery.  By this I mean to say that marriage is a bond forever on this earth.  I am prepared to walk this earth in singleness, however I would love some thoughts on this as foregoing the institute for wrong reasons would be damaging.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Maurice on October 31, 2010, 07:03:16 AM
Tony, Chris, Reformer, troglodytes, shovenists, et el,
  As usual with me and you guys, we are at odds with what Christianity is.


L O L


Mr Warren,
  I have read your article and read through this thread and I am unconvinced. I appreciate your fire and brimstone preaching on some things, but divorce is an area where this is just not practical. Divorce and remarriage is a necessary evil. In other words, it is not something that anyone should take on lightly, but something which we all agree in some cases is a necessity. For example, you can't ask a woman to stay with an abuser. You can't ask a man to stay with an adulterer. You can't ask a person to continue to live with someone who continually puts them down or verbally torments them day after day. This is just not practical. So there are exceptions to the no divorce rule, and rightly, most Ministers of the Church have come to that same conclusion. Except you. And perhaps that is because you cannot empathize with the plight of these poor people, because you have your head so high up in the clouds that you are no earthly good?

Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Do you know what that means? That means we are not under law, but grace. So that you are being legalistic and impractical in coming to the conclusion that no one can divorce. What about the innocent victim of divorce, the person who is abandoned by the unfaithful partner? Does she not have a life?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Melanie on October 31, 2010, 11:46:37 AM
Tony, Chris, Reformer, troglodytes, shovenists, et el,
  As usual with me and you guys, we are at odds with what Christianity is.


L O L


 I'm glad you find faithfulness so amusing. But the marriage covenant is a sacred oath, and that is what you, and those like you, do not understand. God instituted it an unbreakable bond.  It has nothing to do with being a shovenist. And it is all about what true Christianity is. Faithfulness.

 Matthew 19:6
 "Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder".

And why do you guys always bring up the beaten wife red herring? Don't you know that most all marriages that end in divorce have nothing to do with anyone being beaten? You just want to use that to rationalize someone getting a divorce.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Frank Mortimer on October 31, 2010, 01:22:36 PM
The fact is, divorce in the sense and scale the Church permits today is a recent invention, and would have never been condoned in the past.

For example in historical reference, in medieval Scotland, if a couple consented to be married in the present tense, then they were married. Witnesses or Priest didnít matter, though both could substantiate the marriage. The marriage didnít have to be blessed, there didnít have to be a mass. It did not even have to be consummated. This was true until 1940. If a couple became formally betrothed, promising to marry one another at some future date, including witnesses, a marriage contract, and a ceremony, then they were handfasted, or engaged, to be married. They were not married. If, in medieval Scotland, a couple had sex after being Handfasted, whether the betrothal was public at a formal ceremony or privately with no witnesses, they became married when the sex occurred.

Now here is the main point. In medieval Scotland, when a couple married it was for life. There was no trial marriage for a year and a day and no divorce. The only things to negate the marriage were if it was to an underage child, someone too closely related in bloodline, or someone already married to another. There was no divorce or remarriage until the Reformation. Isn't that interesting?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on November 01, 2010, 03:05:52 AM
>>>
Mr Warren,
  I have read your article and read through this thread and I am unconvinced.
<<<

As hard as it might be for you to believe, I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm a witness to the word, and that's all. The convincing or unconvincing, is in God's hands, not mine.

Psalms 119:140
Proverbs 30:5

The pure word is not mine, but His.


Quote
>>>
I appreciate your fire and brimstone preaching on some things, but divorce is an area where this is just not practical.
<<<

Interesting choice of words. "Fire and brimstone" preaching I mean. Maybe that's what it is -- To some. At any rate, you will fit right in with today's Church, as that is their mantra about everything they don't want to accept as God's Word also. i.e., it's just not practical to teach children to abstain from sex before marriage. It's just not practical to not practice birth control. It's just not practical to not have women preachers. It's just not practical to not have two cars. It's just not practical not to work on Sundays, etc., etc., ad nauseum. And yes, in our day they say it's just not practical not to divorce when you've married badly. But when did pragmatism become a replacement for obedience to God's Word? ..is it when apostasy stuck its ugly head into the church doors and was invited in.


Quote
>>>
Divorce and remarriage is a necessary evil.
<<<

Listen to yourself. Necessary Evil! ....as if there is such a thing.


Quote
>>>
In other words, it is not something that anyone should take on lightly, but something which we all agree in some cases is a necessity.
<<<

No, we don't all agree with that, just as we don't all agree we shouldn't mention homosexuality without a long speech on how much we should love them, or how we all sin and that's just another like lying. No, we don't all agree. That is the whole point.


Quote
>>>
For example, you can't ask a woman to stay with an abuser. You can't ask a man to stay with an adulterer. You can't ask a person to continue to live with someone who continually puts them down or verbally torments them day after day.
<<<

You can't, I can!

1st Peter 2:19-23

Or rather, I should say can witness to the Word concerning it, which can fall on deaf ears or on ears opened by the Spirit of God.


Quote
>>>
This is just not practical.
<<<

Not practical in the worldly sense, but it is possible.

Mark 10:27

Oops, there's the key phrase. With God. The problem is, too many people want to do it without God. ..then of course you're right, the can't. They don't have the strength.

How many ministers are with God? Less than most Christians surmise. But then you know, the people who listened to the Jewish leaders of the Lord's congregation a Christ's first advent, generally ended up with them--blind and left with a desolate house.

And unfortunately, over the last few decades, the church has swung more and more to your position, and finds itself (not curiously) in that same boat.

Having said that, let me say that pragmatism is not a dirty word. We all live a life that involves some measure of legitimate pragmatism. Pragmatism is all well and good in its proper sphere. But when pragmatism is used to make moral judgments or decisions about what is right and wrong (law), that is when it becomes an offense to God and His people. As faithful Christians, we cannot look for practical or "politically correct" applications or rules as the guiding philosophy of our life, theology or morality. For example, like divorce, abortion may be practical, but it is not something Christians should ever be involved in. So you can talk about practical all you want, because there is Christian practicality and then there is worldly practicality.

Proverbs 4:25-27

...and they would not. Selah! To the faithful, God's word is our practicality. But to the unrighteous, condemning divorce or homosexuality is considered heartless, cruel and senseless. And therein lies the rub. Because some people confuse pragmatism or practical living with common sense, and especially in marriage. But the two are not at all synonymous. Sure, practical beliefs often are born of common sense, however, common sense does not necessarily harmonize with the world's idea of being practical. Refusing to deny Christ "in a life or death situation" is decidedly impractical for most people. Indeed, it is an idea that "makes no sense" to the practical mind. Nevertheless, to the mind of the Christian, it makes perfect sense. No divorce once married is decidedly practical, and with God, all things are possible.


Quote
>>>
So there are exceptions to the no divorce rule, and rightly, most Ministers of the Church have come to that same conclusion.
<<<

Sadly, in this one point, you are unquestionably correct! Not only ministers, but most "professing" Christians too. But, a tree is known by its fruits. Works count for something, as they are by the Spirit of Christ or antichrist.


Quote
>>>
 Except you.
<<<

Probably because I'm not a Minister of the church, but a minister of the church! Thank God!


Quote
>>>
perhaps that is because you cannot empathize with the plight of these poor people, because you have your head so high up in the clouds that you are no earthly good?
<<<

Empathize, but never justify. Doing the right thing is always the right thing. For that is when even if one stands alone, they are not alone.


Quote
>>>
Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Do you know what that means? That means we are not under law, but grace. So that you are being legalistic and impractical in coming to the conclusion that no one can divorce. What about the innocent victim of divorce, the person who is abandoned by the unfaithful partner? Does she not have a life?
<<<

Yeah--I know what that means. Do you? There is no innocent victim of divorce, never has been, never will be. This despite the traditions and writings of men proclaiming this exception. When you divorce, you victimize yourself!


"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Terrell Meyer on November 01, 2010, 08:26:04 AM
>>>
Divorce and remarriage is a necessary evil.
 

Listen to yourself. Necesarry evil! ....as if there is such a thing.


 Listen indeed! But a lot of Christians feel that exact same way, and it is very disturbing to me. It is this attitude that  annoys me about the Church today. They just don't seem to really care about anything anymore. And they wonder why people say the Church is under judgment? Necessary evil is exactly how I've heard divorce described, even in some Reformed forums. My response is the same as yours. Listen to yourself!
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Rose on November 01, 2010, 04:34:43 PM
Tony,
  Are we going to start this again? Even the great Westminster Confession allows for divorce on at least 2 grounds, and possibly 3. they are: (1) adultery

 Mt 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

 and (2) desertion

 1Co 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

which might also include verbal or spiritual abandonment. So clearly, you are wrong, and I respect the scholarship of the writers of the Westminster Confession more than someone on the internet. No offense meant.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on May 11, 2013, 10:58:04 PM
There are some Christians who believe that we can divorce from remarriage after realize that the relationship is unlawful so wife can return back to first husband. Their defense?

2Sa 3:12  And Abner sent messengers to David on his behalf, saying, Whose is the land? saying also, Make thy league with me, and, behold, my hand shall be with thee, to bring about all Israel unto thee.
2Sa 3:13  And he said, Well; I will make a league with thee: but one thing I require of thee, that is, Thou shalt not see my face, except thou first bring Michal Saul's daughter, when thou comest to see my face.
2Sa 3:14  And David sent messengers to Ishbosheth Saul's son, saying, Deliver me my wife Michal, which I espoused to me for an hundred foreskins of the Philistines.
2Sa 3:15  And Ishbosheth sent, and took her from her husband, even from Phaltiel the son of Laish.
2Sa 3:16  And her husband went with her along weeping behind her to Bahurim. Then said Abner unto him, Go, return. And he returned.

They said, "See, David can claim his first wife from any husband so the Lord should allow her wife to divorce from second husband because its unlawful anyway." 

How do you response to this biblical since I do not believe that we can divorce with anyone in ANY remarriage, whether or not, she can go back to first husband.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Bunyan on May 12, 2013, 04:04:59 AM

I don't quite follow your logic. What David did was sinful. It was not something condoned by God. God's law said a woman cannot return to her first husband. So what are you saying?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on May 12, 2013, 05:20:08 AM
I am saying people use those verses to justify that wife can divorce her second husband in "unlawful marriage" and go back to first husband because they claimed that God would never reconize second marriage anyway because its a sin.   
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Bunyan on May 12, 2013, 05:33:13 AM
I am saying people use those verses to justify that wife can divorce her second husband in "unlawful marriage" and go back to first husband because they claimed that God would never reconize second marriage anyway because its a sin.

I don't see how, as there was no divorce. You say "David can claim his first wife from any husband so the Lord should allow her wife to divorce from second husband because its unlawful anyway."  Where does scripture say that Michal was divorced. I read that her husband went behind her crying, meaning he was still her husband. David did an unrighteous thing. Nowhere does it say she divorced her husband and went back to David. David had all the power and he simply took her, kidnapped her away from her then husband. There's no justification by God for such actions claiming it means he's still married to her. That is just another case of trying to make the bible say something it doesn't say. Any king could do anything he wanted in those days. Doesn't mean it's justified.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on May 12, 2013, 05:47:47 AM
Thats right. I was amazed at people trying to justify their position on david's sin. I wondered ,  If i remember in bible correctly. King saul forced michal to marry another man and there was never a divorce between michal and david to begin with, can david still claim his first wife?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Betty on July 21, 2013, 03:14:34 AM
Perhaps it was a blessing. So David would recognize his sin. Ever think of that?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Melanie on January 14, 2015, 01:26:38 AM
Tony,
  Are we going to start this again? Even the great Westminster Confession allows for divorce on at least 2 grounds, and possibly 3. they are: (1) adultery

 Mt 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

 and (2) desertion

 1Co 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

which might also include verbal or spiritual abandonment. So clearly, you are wrong, and I respect the scholarship of the writers of the Westminster Confession more than someone on the internet. No offense meant.

I don't read anything in any of those passages you submitted about divorce. And the Church confessions aren't God's word. Until you can show us one single verse where God supports divorce, then it is plain that it is you supporting it and not God.

PS. "God calling us to peace" is not the word divorce. You are making a private interpretation and using your own ideas, substituting your own words.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Betty on January 14, 2015, 03:56:49 AM
Rose has it right.

I wish you people would stop attempting to chain women to abusive men when there is no justification for it. And Melanie, as a woman, you should know better and be ashamed of yourself. There is no indissolubility of Marriage. Tony interprets from Matt 19:6 the dogma that mankind cannot break God's bond of marriage and that is an isolated incident that doesn't cover all circumstances. Yes, ideally marriage should not be broken, but we don't live in an ideal world.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Doug Johnson on January 14, 2015, 06:10:26 AM
Our reply to the criticisms from Doug and Layla:

Doug:

Why should he be strapped with a life of celibacy just because his wife made a mistake, or he made a mistake?
 

When God joins two persons in marriage, it is for their lifetime, and man cannot put the union asunder.  No matter what the sins committed, the two people remain one flesh.  Marriage cannot be undone.

J&R

Wow, this is old. Shall I reset my reply notifications? I think that many of you are confusing divorce with annulment. Marriage is permanent, but there is the action of an annulment. A divorce is a dissolution of a legal marriage bond. Not justified in most instances. An annulment is not a divorce, but is a declaration that a necessary element for a valid marriage was lacking at the time of consent, which means a true marriage never occurred.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on January 14, 2015, 12:02:27 PM
>>>
Wow, this is old.
<<<

So is the rhetoric concerning the authority of the Roman Catholic church, but we keep giving you the witness of scripture against it anyway. Nothing new under the sun.


Quote
>>>
I think that many of you are confusing divorce with annulment.
<<<

Not really. Annulment is the euphemistic name that Catholics give to divorce so that they may be disobedient to God's Word in good conscience (seemingly).


Quote
>>>
Marriage is permanent, but there is the action of an annulment.
<<<

If marriage is permanent (and it is) then divorce (the denial of that permanence) is unlawful, which means using its euphemistic title of annulment is unlawful also. If God hates divorce (and He does) then God hates annulment. And that which He hates, He doesn't condone, bless or deem lawful. No matter what some professing Christians may suppose.



Quote
>>>
A divorce is a dissolution of a legal marriage bond.
<<<

Correct! An unrighteous dissolution of a legal marriage bond.


Quote
>>>
Not justified in most instances.
<<<

Divorce is not justified in any instance according to God's Word that He hates it, and that man shall not pull that marriage apart. So then, are you justifying that which God hates, or are you making the claim that God doesn't actually hate it and so it's justified? ...Pick your poison!


Quote
>>>
An annulment is not a divorce, but is a declaration that a necessary element for a valid marriage was lacking at the time of consent...
<<<

What would that thing lacking be? The word of the Roman Catholic Church?  Did the Lord speak that in secret to you or did you hear it in a seance? The truth is, "consent" before God is the necessary element that is present in all marriages or betrothals, no matter what time, what nation, what church, what religion, what culture or what non-religious government.

Isaiah 45:19

What the Lord speaks, He speaks in the light. So if He had declared that, we could all read it within the pages of scripture, rather than from the mouths of men.


Quote
>>>
...which means a true marriage never occurred.
<<<

New flash! The Roman Catholic church's dogma isn't required for a valid marriage, else no one on earth was ever married before it came into existence some years ago.

Genesis 28:28
[li"And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also."[/li][/list]
 
Obviously, and without fear of contradiction, you are mistaken! There was legal marriage before God before the Catholic church.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on January 14, 2015, 12:05:21 PM
>>>
I wish you people would stop attempting to chain women to abusive men when there is no justification for it.
<<<

"We people," meaning God's people? .We're not trying to chain any woman to any man, their marriage (if they are married) has already done that. Abuse is a different subject than marriage and divorce. I believe there is another thread on abuse and the options available.

1st Corinthians 7:11

"Put Away" means divorce. There can be no divorce, even if she is abandoned. But this thread concerns God's view of marriage and divorce versus man's view of it. God's view is that a marriage vow is a oath before God that is binding until death. Thus divorce should never be contemplated by faithful Christians.

1st Corinthians 7:39


Quote
>>>
And Melanie, as a woman, you should know better and be ashamed of yourself.
<<<

You think that because Melanie is a woman that she should serve her gender, rather than God? No, the truth is, you should be ashamed of yourself. Nothing comes before Christ, not nation, genealogy, mother, father, sister, brother, Jew, Gentile, race, tribe, party or gender. Some things are good in God's eyes and needful, and it's not justifying divorce, it's tending to Christ.

Luke 10:41-42

There are the things that are needful, the good things--and then there are the things that the world are troubled over and bothered about. Melanie has chosen the good thing. To have a LORD who is ruler over her, rather than to puff out the chest to rule over herself in worldly logic and rationalizations. Those who have need to be ashamed are of a different spirit.


Quote
>>>
There is no indissolubility of Marriage.
<<<

That would clearly negate God's Word that He hates divorce and of the permanence of marriage (dissolved only by death), the binding that He declares man should not pull apart. Marriage is a testimony to the power of Grace and unity and the indissolubility of it are essential properties of it. The truth is, the indissolubility of marriage is the outward symbol in God's church of the spiritual reality of God's fidelity to His chosen people.

Ephesians 5:24-25

What type of love/agapao would that be? It is unconditional wherein He will never leave nor forsake us, no matter what our transgression. The violation of covenant marriage is a destruction of the most powerful symbol of the love of God for us, Christ for the Church. So if there is no indissolubility of covenant marriage, there is no indissolubility of Christ's marriage to the church. A devastating and horrible thing to contemplate.


Quote
>>>
Tony interprets from Matt 19:6 the dogma that mankind cannot break God's bond of marriage and that is an isolated incident that doesn't cover all circumstances.
<<<

I interpreted nothing, what I did was bear witness to what God actually said, rather than attempt to justify my disobedience to what He actually said. Let me (as I have done many times before) address your concerns of Matthew 19, and in doing so demonstrate the difference between interpretation and quoting God's word, word for word that His people may Keep it. It's not an interpretation that God commands man not break the marriage Covenant, it's FLATLY what God said. Exhibit "A," "B," and "C":

Matthew 19:6

God says He's the certifier of that covenant bond of marriage, and man must not pull it apart. That's a witness to His Words, a testimony to Christ's declaration, not my personal opinion or interpretation of it.

Mark 10:9

Again, Christ's very own Words, not subject to private interpretation, twisting or manipulation.

Romans 7:2

Doesn't require any re-interpretation, no adding to it to change it's meaning, and no taking away from it so that it doesn't mean what it says. It is concise and unambiguous. It's neither vague nor unclear. It's not uncertain or confusing. It's not indistinct or cryptic. Not inconclusive, puzzling, questionable, doubtful, enigmatical or unintelligible. A faithful Christian simply cannot pull apart a Covenant marriage because God has joined the two together. They are "BOUND" together so long as they live. How long is "...for as long as you live?" does that RE-interpret to "so long as there are no marital offenses?" NO, it means exactly what it says and the law cannot be broken.


Quote
>>>
Yes, ideally marriage should not be broken, but we don't live in an ideal world.
<<<

God's Word isn't made void because we don't live in an ideal world. I think you are confusing the concept of "deals" with "ideals." God doesn't make deals where He'll wink at disobedience if you think it justified by the situation (2nd Samuel 6:6-7), He fully expects our obedience, and in Christ we are.

Ecclessiastes 12:13-14

Yes, for many "professing" Christians the God-ideal seems to be almost entirely forgotten, nevertheless the faithful Christian keeps (preserves) His Holy word in desiring the perfection that can only accomplished in Christ Jesus. Are we in Christ to surrender our will to His as LORD, or in disobedience to justify ourselves before Him.

Nahum 1:7

It's all about trust. So when you say the marriage Covenant ideally should not be broken BUT, ...what you are really saying is that I know God wants me to do this, "but" sometimes we must trust in ourselves and can't do what God wants. Yes, yes, I know those aren't "the actual words you used," but it's more of the mindset of man where he is "inclined" to justify himself, it's a spirit, a fixed mental attitude or disposition that predetermines a person's responses to trial, tribulations and interpretations of God's word depending upon the situation.

It isn't "Yes, ideally marriage should not be broken, but we don't live in an ideal world," rather it's "Yes God says marriage should not be broken, so though I live in this world I will not respond like this world."


"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Maurice on January 14, 2015, 01:11:30 PM
 :hammerhead:
Tony, you are so long winded, especially overbearing with people. Divorce is not this cut and dried issue that you think it is. Why not stop talking so much and start listening a little. We've heard all this before. But you can't have law without compassion. Why not stop preaching so much and start loving a little.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: John on January 14, 2015, 10:59:55 PM
Quote
Tony, you are so long winded, especially overbearing with people.

No! Not "overbearing" but "forbearing" - that is, patient (more than you deserve). He patiently provide instruction from Gods' word and refutes the same vapid arguments for divorce and annulment made by the same group of stiff necked and rebellious people who think effectively using the Bible for toilet paper is 'loving' ... but those who obey God's unambiguous commands shows a lack of compassion.  What you really mean is: "love" is really "lawlessness". You do whatever seems good in your eyes, Bible be damned - and because your position is an offense to God you feign to have a higher moral ground  motivated out of "love".

If you actually "loved" in the Christian sense you would hear God's commandments about divorce and obey - His commandments are not heavy (despite your claims to the contrary).

By this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not heavy. - 1Jn 5:2-3

Quote
Divorce is not this cut and dried issue that you think it is.

Really? What is it that you find so complicated? You know, most everyone I've ever talked with who vehemently defended divorce was someone who was divorced themselves. They would not hear the Bible on the matter because they knew it condemned them. So, they obfuscate and pretended to be bewildered - no matter how many times they were corrected by God's word, they just put their teeth on edge and turn back to defend themselves for their sinful actions. As such, their ears are stopped and they cannot hear God speaking - it is the judgment of God against them.

Quote
Why not stop talking so much and start listening a little.

You mean, why not stop quoting the Scriptures - which you cannot gainsay against - and instead start using your "feelings" as your guide. It makes you "feel" better to believe that people should be able to divorce. Are you not aware? God says your "feelings" are rotten, sinful, trash - they have no validity. Your heartfelt "love" for people in troubled marriages that causes you to "feel" they should divorce is of the same stuff that flows through city sewers. You are selling an idea that is from Satan - time to wake up.

Quote
We've heard all this before.

No doubt you've "heard" all God's words before, many, many times before as witnessed by those on this forum ... and yet it is clear you have never "heard" God's word before.

Act_7:57  And crying out with a loud voice, they held their ears and rushed on him with one passion.

Oh sure, people have "heard" what God says through many faithful witnesses on this forum, happens all the time - but because they have the same "kill the messenger" attitude - with their hand firmly over their ears - it is impossible for them to receive it.

Quote
But you can't have law without compassion.

More accurately, you mean: We will not have God's Law! Our sinful man-centered "compassion" will be our law. That's the sad truth of it.

When any honest person looks upon the current state of society ravished by your "compassion" for divorce (and remarriage), the penalty is overwhelmingly painful to see. Broken families, destroyed lives, children traumatized and forever unable to trust, selfish parents abandoning their children, the image of God as Father defaced so that divorced children cannot trust God and go on through their lives hating. Then there are all the other ramification of the sin of divorce and remarriage: child abuse, neglect, rape, molestation ... and the children that go on to become drug/alcohol abusers, caught in sexual sins (looking for love), so many empty souls with no ability to trust or love - many that eventually end their lives in suicide or fill the prisons.

God's laws are compassionate!, they are by definition "loving" - precisely because they were designed by God to avoid this very disgrace from happening - if they had only been obeyed (but the arrogance of self-righteous man will not have it so).

Quote
Why not stop preaching so much and start loving a little.

How's about YOU stop acting out of emotion and feelings and start judging aright - keep God's commandments! 

Joh_14:15  If ye love me, keep my commandments.

It's far simpler than you think. If you refuse God's commandments - trying to sell people on some other way that makes you happy - then you DON'T LOVE GOD!  Further, not only are you not a Christian (follower of Christ) when you refuse to repent and humble yourself, God will ensure your further blindness by not revealing Himself to you (though the Scriptures).

Joh 14:21  He that has My commandments and keeps them, it is that one who loves Me; and the one that loves Me shall be loved by My Father, and I shall love him and will reveal Myself to him.

Those who go their own arrogant way and oppose God are like the blind  - God hides Himself from the proud - and these spiritually blind, so-called Christians, will together come to a very bad end unless they repent

Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy concerning you, saying: "This people draws near to Me with their mouth, and with their lips honor Me; but their heart holds far off from Me. But in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men." - Mat 15:7-9

Are you offended by the commandments of God? Do you now feel morally superior in your elevated status being more "compassionate" than others because you do not forbid divorce? Consider that you are declaring to everyone within earshot that you are not a Christian. Do you not think that God will root you up? Don't be so foolish to think otherwise.

Then coming, the disciples said to Him, You know that hearing the Word, the Pharisees were offended? But answering, He said, Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted shall be rooted up. Leave them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind; and if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit. - Mat 15:12-14


Some will follow the discordant piping of these blind leaders - but the pit God describes for them is eternal. At such a cost, is it really so hard to put away your pride and hear the truth?

Pro_29:23 The pride of man brings him low, but the humble of spirit takes hold of honor.

It is for all Christians an honor to know God and obey!

john
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Deuce Johnson on January 15, 2015, 04:59:34 AM
Quote
Tony, you are so long winded, especially overbearing with people.

No! Not "overbearing" but "forbearing" - that is, patient (more than you deserve).
john


 :ditto:  Well said. Some people don't deserve the time and patience of good men. They abuse it!



Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Gilda on January 17, 2015, 06:26:13 AM
Joh_14:15  If ye love me, keep my commandments.

It's far simpler than you think. If you refuse God's commandments - trying to sell people on some other way that makes you happy - then you DON'T LOVE GOD!  Further, not only are you not a Christian (follower of Christ) when you refuse to repent and humble yourself, God will ensure your further blindness by not revealing Himself to you (though the Scriptures).

A Big  :amen: to That!

 It's not just law vs grace, it's law by grace!


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Maurice on January 18, 2015, 08:10:58 AM

A Big  :amen: to That!

 It's not just law vs grace, it's law by grace!



  :S_Confused:  What does that even mean?

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Maurice on January 18, 2015, 08:39:16 AM
No! Not "overbearing" but "forbearing"


 I don't know what dictionary you use, but mine defines overbearing as being overly dominant, to deal with issues harshly, to be snooty and arrogant. I would say that fits the bill. The Reformed faith exudes a conceited, self-important and superior spirit. That's not patient, that's prideful.


Quote

patient (more than you deserve).

Like I said, overbearing, dominant, harsh, snooty and arrogant. As for what I deserve, I thought that you Reformed christians taught that none of us deserved grace. As usual John, you contradict your own teaching.

 I Timothy 3:2
 "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;"
 II Timothy 2:24
  "And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,"

Tony? hmmmmm,  "maybe." You Not by a long shot! Your doctrine of grace is whatever you feel on any given day.


Quote
If you actually "loved" in the Christian sense you would hear God's commandments about divorce and obey -


I don't know, but in Christian doctrine isn't love supposed to be seasoned by grace, compassion and benevolence?


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: spices51 on February 17, 2015, 04:25:10 PM
 The  question I have is when a woman divorces her husband , is it right  for the husband to pursue and be with other women?? . I read in the Bible that you are to remain single and not to remarry. The Lord says  divorce is wrong and I believe what the Lord says . Some people I know teach that it is wrong but do the opposite of what they teach.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 18, 2015, 12:32:03 AM
Quote
The  question I have is when a woman divorces her husband , is it right  for the husband to pursue and be with other women??

No! But a woman who ignores God's word that she shouldn't divorce, is in no position to judge a man who remarries after she divorces him. Both are equally in the wrong. God encourages us to forsake the words of men, and be obedient to his word concerning the marriage covenant. But it takes the spirit for us to have that power to obey. Without it, people think they know everything and will do what seems right to them.

 1Co 2:4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:


Quote
I read in the Bible that you are to remain single and not to remarry.

Yes, the Bible says we are not to divorce. If our partner divorces us we are to remain single or be reconciled to our spouse. Same with the wife, if a wife sins against God by divorcing, the husband is to remain single. Or even if one were to separate from the other, they both are not to remarry, but remain single.

 1Co 7:10  And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
 12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

But as I said, if we have disobeyed and divorced, it's likely we will obey by not remarrying either.


Quote
The Lord says  divorce is wrong and I believe what the Lord says . Some people I know teach that it is wrong but do the opposite of what they teach.

Sad but true, most pastors and ministers teach that God hates divorce, but then they turn right around and say you can divorce for any number of reasons. God has a word for that. It's called Hypocrite!

 Ro 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Maurice on February 26, 2015, 05:15:18 AM
The  question I have is when a woman divorces her husband , is it right  for the husband to pursue and be with other women??


Why not? She's not married to him anymore, by her own decision to divorce him, right? So why should she be worried about what a man does whom she obviously doesn't even want to be with anymore, except spite. Women are spiteful creatures.  What good person would divorce a man and then try and find reasons for him to be miserable by forcing him to remain single? A spiteful woman, that's who. The question is, is that christian, or is that hateful?

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Melanie on May 12, 2015, 09:11:10 PM

A Big  :amen: to That!

 It's not just law vs grace, it's law by grace!


  :S_Confused:  What does that even mean?

Maurice,
   It means that we have a desire to keep God's law, by Grace. Not of ourselves and not to gain favor, but by God's blessing.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Fred on May 13, 2015, 08:29:19 PM


Better not to be under law in the first place. Be under Grace. Then you won't have to worry about it. :)

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Fred on May 14, 2015, 10:48:14 AM
Quote
>>>
So there are exceptions to the no divorce rule, and rightly, most Ministers of the Church have come to that same conclusion.
<<<

Sadly, in this one point, you are unquestionably correct! Not only Ministers, but most "professing" Christians too. But, a tree is known by its fruits.

You bring up the command not to divorce as if that can only have one meaning. Scripture tells us that it may mean that is the ideal, but there are exceptions. You can't think that you are the end all and last word in marriage and divorce.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: lpowell on May 14, 2015, 09:34:47 PM
God always has the last word.  And here at the end of the Old Testament he says with no conditions:

Malachi 2:14 Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.
15 And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.
16 For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.

Why does man want divorce?  To cover over a multitude of sins, usually in both the husband and wife.  Thus divorce is a just another attempt at outward righteousness like Adam's fig leaves.  And it is corruptible, not solving anything permanently.

1 Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

Do you remember the root of the reason by which Christ could put away that law of divorce given by Moses?  It was given so that the Israelites with hard hearts, defiled by foreign wives, could put them away, Ezra 9, Mat 19:8.  And even before that, so that God could divorce Israel, sending her into captivity for her whoredom.
   Well, with the cross, the gospel was to go to all peoples.  And as a result, Peter learned that no man or woman was to be called unclean, Acts 10:28, 1 Cor 7:14.  And with the work of propitiation completed, Christ' marriage to the eternal bride is permanent.   He can't divorce His wife and no spouse needs to be divorced for being unclean.

Hebrews 13:5 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

   If we have all things in Christ. there is no longer any need for His new creation to lust for another.

Lloyd


Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on May 17, 2015, 12:33:33 PM
>>>
You bring up the command not to divorce as if that can only have one meaning. Scripture tells us that it may mean that is the ideal, but there are exceptions.
<<<

I bring up the command not to divorce as if that can only have one meaning, but it's just an ideal?

Here's some dictionary meanings of the word ideal.

1. a person or thing conceived as embodying conforming to a standard
2. something exactly right for a particular purpose, situation, or person
3. that which is taken as a model for imitation
4. something in its absolute perfection
5. the ultimate standard for excellence


Yes, I'd say God's command not to divorce is the standard we are told to conform to. You do know that not committing rape is the ideal God has established for His people? Does that mean that we can violate God's law and rape under certain circumstances because we don't want to keep the ideal? And of course, that's a foolish question because it's contrived, just as the one where you say I bring up the command not to divorce as if that can only have one meaning, but it's just an ideal." Not stealing is the Christian ideal. Not having an abortion is the Christian ideal. Everything that is not sin, is the Christian ideal. Your justification of sin as just not reaching the ideal, notwithstanding.

There are no grey areas, the ideal "IS" what God commands. He doesn't say do the best you can and if you succumb to the flesh, that's OK. He says sin not! He doesn't say see if you can stay married, and if not you are free to divorce. On the contrary, He says that's the wife of your Covenant or Promise and she is bound to you so long as you live, not merely bound until you see fit to pull it asunder. We understand that if the commands of Scripture have more than one meaning depending upon who is reading them, then they have no meaning at all. God is immutable. He doesn't hate divorce for one and love it for another. Whatsoever the Lord hates, by definition, is sin. All rationalizations notwithstanding, divorce is sin any way you cut it.


Quote
>>>
You can't think that you are the end all and last word in marriage and divorce.
<<<

You're right, I can't and I don't. But God's Word is, and that is what the liberals are really arguing against. Not my witness of the Word, but the Word itself. God's Word (which they don't like) grates upon them because they have their own ideas, which God calls the imaginations of their own hearts. Of course, professing Christians will never admit it, but it's really just an attempt to (by any means necessary) circumvent God's Word with the words of men in order to justify their wants, needs and beliefs. But God is not ambiguous when it comes to how He feels about divorce.

Malachi 2:16

That's God's Word, and it is the last word in divorce. He instituted the promise of marriage by a man and woman cleaving together and He hates divorce, no exceptions.

Romans 7:2

The last word from God is that people are married as long as they live.  It is man who adds the addendum that "it ain't necessarily so."

1st Corinthians 7:39

The end all on divorce is from God's Word not mine, and His Word is that marriage is a Covenant/Oath/Promise that binds two together as long as they live, which means until one of them is dead. No other exceptions. So you're not arguing with me, but with God. Is it really His precept that man doesn't really particularly like?

  Truth inspires change.

"nosce te ipsum"
Tony Warren

"Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment? -Malachi 2:17"
The Doctrines of Grace!
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on May 17, 2015, 12:46:36 PM
>>>
If you actually "loved" in the Christian sense you would hear God's commandments about divorce and obey -

I don't know, but in Christian doctrine isn't love supposed to be seasoned by grace, compassion and benevolence?
<<<

Maurice,
  Seriously, what agnostics know of Christian doctrine could fit on the head of a pin. All they know, by their own admission, is that they don't know. The fact is, Christian doctrine is seasoned with grace, compassion and benevolence, but not as unbelievers, secular authorities and agnostics define the word. The diverse definitions are like apples and oranges. In Christ, compassion is not allowance, approval or compromise, it's a earnest desire for man's deliverance, it's the preaching of the gospel in the midst of reviling and persecutions, it's taking up the cross and following Christ. That's true compassion, not the act of attempting to justify man's sins. If any man ascribes anything of Christianity to provisional disobedience, necesarry evil, conditional allowances or contingent obedience, he knows nothing of true Christian grace, compassion or benevolence, and has an erroneous knowledge of Christ.

What John said is 100% true. If you actually "loved" in the Christian sense you would hear God's commandments about divorce, and have an earnest desire to obey. Now that's love of God.

John 14:21
John 15:10
1st John 5:2
1st John 5:3
2nd John 1:6

Do you see a "pattern there" by God illustrating what true Christian love, benevolence and charity is? Not as man defines it, but as God defines it.

"nosce te ipsum"
Tony Warren

"I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent. -Revelation 3:18-19"
The Doctrines of Grace!
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Blade on May 18, 2015, 12:45:41 AM
Maurice,
  Seriously, what agnostics know of Christian doctrine could fit on the head of a pin. All they know, by their own admission, is that they don't know.


               Question: What's the difference between Agnosticism and Apatheism?

                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 ||
                                                                 \/


                                   Answer: I don't know and I don't care.

I know, wrong forum. I couldn't resist :)
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Granny on May 20, 2015, 07:45:50 PM
That's God's Word, and it is the last word in divorce. He instituted the promise of marriage by a man and woman cleaving together and He hates divorce, no exceptions.

Romans 7:2
  • "For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband."

The last word from God is that people are married as long as they live.  It is man who adds the addendum that "it ain't necessarily so."

Is that a dig at an old song?  :) I remember that old horrible hymn of the same name. "the things that you're liable, to read in the Bible, it ain't necessarily so."

I hated that song, even before I became truly saved. Even then it rang untrue.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Melanie on January 30, 2019, 12:45:53 AM
Never heard of the song, but I know that there are many Christians who don't believe every word of the bible. Be it about creation, predestination, the bondage of the will or marriage and divorce. I agree with Tony that God hates divorce, and God doesn't permit what he hates.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Betty on February 01, 2019, 10:11:45 AM
I agree with Tony that God hates divorce, and God doesn't permit what he hates.

Tony is hyper conservative and has no compassion for those trapped in bad marriages. My minister is a minister of love and shows compassion for those who, by no fault of their own, have fallen into bad marriages. She teaches that there are 20 golden reasons and exceptions to the prohibition of divorce. She doesn't say that these are cases where there should always be a divorce, but these are legitimate reasons where there can be divorce. The list is as follows.

1. Adultery
2. Fornication
3. Irreconcilable Differences
4. cheating
5. Mental Illness
6. Desertion
7. Non Support
8. Bigamy
9. Fraud or lying to get into the marriage
10. Criminal activity, conviction or imprisonment
11. Physical abuse
12. Desertion
13. Drug addiction or alcohol abuse
14. Verbal and mental abuse
15. Underage marriage
16. Arranged marriages
17. Impotence
18. Husband no longer loves the wife, or vice versa
19. Incompatibility
20. Breakdown of trust
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on February 01, 2019, 11:51:50 AM
Quote from: Betty
My minister is a minister of love and shows compassion for those who, by no fault of their own, have fallen into bad marriages. She teaches that there are 20 golden reasons and exceptions to the prohibition of divorce.

Your minister is a woman? No wonder where you come from!

The Scripture is clear that God hates divorce, the binding that He Himself declares that man should NOT pull apart... for any reason. Even the reasons that your pastor listed! Your minister is not a minister of love because her support of divorce which is a violation of covenant marriage is a destruction of the most powerful symbol of the love of God for us, Ephesians 5:24-25.

Christ's very own Words are not subject to you or your private interpretation, twisting or manipulations based on your feelings, or what seems right in your own eyes: 

Romans 7:2
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: yaboo on February 01, 2019, 07:31:31 PM
Your minister is a woman? No wonder where you come from!

That's sexist.


Quote
The Scripture is clear that God hates divorce, the binding that He Himself declares that man should NOT pull apart... for any reason.

Not really true. There are reasons for divorce. That pulling apart was only for certain reasons.

"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" Matthew 19:3

They asked about divorce every cause, and Christ said no not every cause and gave the cause of fornication as the exception for divorce.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: aquatic on February 02, 2019, 12:54:06 AM
Your minister is a woman? No wonder where you come from!

That's sexist.




No. Itís biblical. 

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Betty on February 02, 2019, 05:18:25 AM
Your minister is a woman? No wonder where you come from!

That's sexist.




No. Itís biblical. 


Sexist is not biblical, it's a doctrine of man.


Quote
1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

That was just for the ancient times when women were uneducated, that is not for today.

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: aquatic on February 02, 2019, 03:12:08 PM
Your minister is a woman? No wonder where you come from!

That's sexist.




No. Itís biblical. 


Sexist is not biblical, it's a doctrine of man.


Quote
1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

That was just for the ancient times when women were uneducated, that is not for today.

God didnít make Eve uneducated. Education or intelligence has nothing to do with keeping silent and not teaching. Paul tells us why a woman shouldnít usurp authority over a man or teach:

-Woman was formed after man
-Woman was deceived and not the man

God ordained roles for each sex, so let the woman submit to man as intended. To be a spiritual picture of Christ and the church. If we let the woman usurp authority over the man, itís as if the church is usurping authority over Christ, which is completely backwards. But thatís what we see nowadays. Everything is upside down, but donít worry Christ said it would be a mess before He returned.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 03, 2019, 08:13:04 AM
>>>
Your minister is a woman? No wonder where you come from!

That's sexist.
<<<

Actually, it's "Christian." Followers of Christ teach that a woman cannot be the Pastor or leader of the church because God has ordained very different roles for women and men, and instituted the man as the representative head of the woman, even as Christ is head of the church. If you define sexism as an evil prejudice against women, then Christians have no part in that. If you define sexism as a type of anti-feminism where we receive God's word of the creation order and forbidding women to have authority over men, then yes Christianity is decidedly anti-feminism. That is to say, "providing" you define feminism as women being considered the same as men, having the identical offices, roles or as an advocate of having the same rights to serve in any position a man does. Then Yes. Women have no "right" to serve as Ministers and Pastors of the church "because" the church bylaws that were instituted by God, forbid it. And Christians by nature follow the authority of word's word.

1st Corinthians 14:34-35

For women to speak in leadership roles over men in the public church would be an act of rebellion against God and of independence from their corporate head, which is their husband. Women are by law commanded of God to be in subjection to their husbands (Titus 2:5; 1st Peter 3:1), even as the church (faithful) is in subjection to Christ.

Ephesians 5:23

The difference between Christians and unbelievers is belief! The fact is, men and women were not, and are not created equal. Equal in Christ, in human worth and equal before the throne of grace? Absolutely! But if you insist that "equal" means exactly the same, created for exactly the same things, glory of God and roles, then you contradict science, the Bible, biology, historical fact and just plain common sense. Does God look upon women as intrinsically unequal with a man? Yes. Men are simply different (and thus necessarily unequal), but we all stand on the same ground in Christ Jesus, as we all have feet of clay. Does God have a divine order of things and roles based on sex? Absolutely! As His stewards, we faithfully hold to His precepts concerning this creation order and the roles of men and women. Christians should make no concessions or apologies for that.

1st Corinthians 11:3

That's God's word, which Christians are supposed to follow as a rule. So we must be careful to not (on the ground of God's lack of distinction between men and women in Christ Jesus), claim equality with the male on ecclesiastical grounds, overstepping the bounds of God preordained propriety,


Quote
>>>
The Scripture is clear that God hates divorce, the binding that He Himself declares that man should NOT pull apart... for any reason.

Not really true. There are reasons for divorce. That pulling apart was only for certain reasons.
<<<

Of course, there are reasons for divorce. But none God sanctioned. Moreover, the idea of divorce for fornication is a well-traveled fallacy that is  based on a misnomer that is in the verse you submitted. The fallacy that the word translated "except" in Matthew 19 permits divorce for [porneia] or illicit nakedness. The illicit sexual activity we call fornication. It's the same word we get our English word pornographic from. The unpalatable truth is, there is no exception permitting divorce in Christ's edict. Neither for illicit nakedness, unchasteness, fornication, pornographic behavior or whatever you want to call it. Indeed that misconception is exactly what Christ was addressing with the Pharisees. The Pharisees were testifying that the law of Moses allowed divorce for this illicit nakedness (fornication).

Deuteronomy 24:1-2

This is the exact law of Moses where Moses allowed the Jews to divorce for fornication, the unchasteness in their wives. The Hebrew word that is translated uncleanness is [`ervah], meaning some illicit nakedness. In modern vernacular, fornication or illicit sexual behavior. Moses allowed them to divorce for this fornication. I'm well aware of the supposition that the Pharisees wanted to divorce their wives for any little thing, but you must know this is supposition, not something that is found in the word of God. For an example, you need to look no further than Joseph. When he thought Mary was with child illicitly, we would have divorced her with this law of Moses, but the Holy Ghost intervened.

So then, how could Christ be saying that this law of Moses was not to be from the beginning because God has joined Husband and wife together and they cannot be torn apart--while also saying, that you are permitted to divorce your wife for this same fornication upholding the law of Moses concerning this. Most Christians don't want to delve into this too deeply because it is unpalatable, since it is "their will" to divorce for fornication. Not God's. But the logic (considering the text) makes no sense. because it's not true. Let's briefly go over this whole conversation Christ has with these Pharisees:


Quote
>>>
"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" Matthew 19:3
<<<

The word translated every is an unfortunate but accurate translation, as it should have been translated "any." Regardless, every reason "in this context" means any reason.

#1. The Greek word [pas] means all (all = any).
#2. Regardless, "every" by definition means "any"-- i.e., if there is a prohibition against "every reason" for divorce, there is a prohibition against "any reason."
#3. The context that the word is in demands that it be translated "any" since that is the crux of their original question, and their follow up question.

The scenario "in context" is that they decide to test Christ by asking Him if there can be divorce for any reason (the idea they were asking if anyone could divorce every reason is juvenile). No Jew or anyone else believed you could divorce for every reason (a hang-nail, a bad word, a frown, Etc.) These were devout Jews. They wanted to know if there could be divorce for "any" reason.

Christ answers, absolutely No, the married are as one flesh and what God has joined together, let not man pull that apart. So Christ unambiguously answered their question. And they understood His answer (unlike Christians topday). Consequently they objected to Christ's teaching that there could be no divorce and they retorted in effect, "then why did Moses allow for divorce?" Again, the law of Moses that allowed for divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1) was for [`ervah] or illicit nudity, and by extension unchastity or fornication. That's what they are asking. Why did Moses allow divorce for fornication? Did Christ back down and say, I meant you can divorce for fornication by this law of Moses? No, Christ again answers without retraction and states that Moses allowed it because of their hard-heartedness. This is why Moses suffered (allowed) them to divorce, but He says this was never what God had instituted for His children from the beginning.

So Christ has fully answered their questions of why there cannot be divorce and why Moses had allowed divorce for fornication or illicit nakedness. So having addressed the law of Moses that allowed divorce for fornication, He continues saying, and whoever shall divorce his wife for anything "beside" fornication and shall marry another committeth adultery. Thus Christ has answered them Fully. They cannot divorce for fornication as the law of Moses allowed, and they cannot divorce for anything "beside" fornication. That word translated "except" hrows people, but it is merely illustrating Christ has thus covered all bases. The word "except" [ei me] in this context means beside. If you do a study on the word you will find that it literally means "If Not."  So literally the passage reads that they cannot divorce them for fornication as the law of Moses allowed, and they cannot divorce them for anything "if not" fornication, or "beside" fornication, because to divorce and marry another is committing adultery. This is what many do not understand about the holy text there. It's not giving fornication as an exception, that was covered in His explaining why the Law of Moses allowed divorce for that. It was concluding that to divorce and mary another for anything beside fornication is adultery. The word means divorce for any reason except or beside the reason just talked about is adultery.

Mathew 19:17
Luke 6:4/b]
John 3:13

That word translated "but" is the same word, and in this context it means no one "except or beside" Christ came down from heaven. Or no one "beside" the priests alone. No one is good beside God.


Quote
>>>
They asked about divorce every cause, and Christ said no not every cause and gave the cause of fornication as the exception for divorce.
<<<

That's a common misconception. Actually, they asked if divorce for any cause or reason was permissible, and Christ answers that there should not be divorce for any reason. Not for fornication as prescribed by thelaw of Moses, and not for any reason "beside" fornication. He continues that to divorce and marry another is to commit adultery. Now the thing is, it's clear to any honorable reader that they were all astounded by Christ's answer. They're not astounded because Christ allowed for divorce for only unchastity or fornication, they are astounded because Christ allowed for No Divorce at all. They are astounded because He said there could not be divorce as the law of Moses allowed, and not for any reason. Even Christ's Disciples who dearly love the Lord were astounded by this teaching. So taken back by His words that when they were in private with Him, they again asked clarification about this extraordinary proclamation. They had to make sure He was saying exactly what they heard. The book of Mark puts in more succinctly unambiguously stating there can be no divorce, period.

Mark 10:7-12

You see, unlike most Christians today, they understood perfectly what God was saying and it was so astounding that they wanted Christ to tell them again, and not a word about "Yes, you can divorce for fornication."  Indeed Christ clarified it without retraction, that there cannot be divorce for any reason, and if you divorce and marry another you have committed adultery. He sticks with the ONE-FLESH analogy where they can never be separated. Something that seems anathema to modern day Christians, but was the church teaching throughout its History and (generally) maintained until recently. So the question is, has the church become more faithful to God's word about divorce in modern times, or less faithful? Are they rationalizing more so that they can do their own will, or are they earnestly contending for the faith and desiring to do the will of God? Claiming God hates divorce but claiming God says you can divorce anyway is like saying God hates sin but God says you can sin anyway. It's a contradiction in terms.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"i acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 03, 2019, 08:49:06 AM
>>>
I agree with Tony that God hates divorce, and God doesn't permit what he hates.

Tony is hyper conservative and has no compassion for those trapped in bad marriages.
<<<

Hyper-conservative? Is that a bad thing? A quick check in my dictionary on that word will assure that I understand it accurately:
Yeah, I guess you are pretty much on target. I am delighted to be conservative, to preserve the existing doctrines that are testified from God's word, and once handed down by the saints.

As for compassion, in God's eyes, it is revealed in His servants going forth with the saving gospel, and the love of holding fast to His faithful teachings so that His people do not fall into false doctrines that will place their mortal souls in danger. That is the "agape" benevolence and compassion that God requires of those who truly love Him. That is, as opposed to lip service. Love is not telling people what they want to hear, it is holding fast or conserving His teachings.

1st John 5:2-3

Love of God and consequently love of the brethren is not defined by the world's ideas of compassion, but by God's word that we keep (conserve, preserve) the commandments or law that He has given us. If we have no earnest desire to conserve or KEEP (protect from harm or destruction) His laws, then we have no evidence that we are actually saved at all. It is "by this" that we know we love the children of God. As God's word says, "when we love God and keep his commandments." When we are conservative so that we hold fast the faith grounded on the solid foundation of the "authority" of the word of God.

2nd Timothy 1:13-14

I'm sorry but divorce is a house of cards once it is carefully examined without the rationalizations of modern vain philosophies and secular humanism. God doesn't give license to His church to do that thing that He has declared He hates. There are no "situation ethics" with God, it is always black and white, wide and narrow, good and evil, right and wrong. It is only the will of man that desires/wills/yearns to make lukewarm what God has made hot and cold.


Quote
>>>
My minister is a minister of love and shows compassion for those who, by no fault of their own, have fallen into bad marriages.
<<<

Generally speaking, no one in this country is in a marriage by no fault of their own. If you marry someone, it's your fault. Stand up and take responsibility for your actions and stop attempting to shift the blame on someone else. All decisions have consequences. And God's word could not be clearer on the folly of breaking that marriage covenant or oath that you have made before him. ...your minister's words notwithstanding.

Mark 10:11-12

Do you think God will say "the responsibility is not mine if I choose to divorce and marry another?" Sin needs to be recognized, not denied. Forgiveness comes with repentence, not denial.

1t John 1:8-10

What God has joined together, let not man pull it apart.  There is no "No-Fault" divorce option in God's economy. There is no unseen villain that "allegedly" forced me into taking a marriage oath witnessed before God wherein it is not my fault. That's wishful thinking by unfaithful Christians.


Quote
>>>
She teaches that there are 20 golden reasons and exceptions to the prohibition of divorce.
<<<

That is the operative phrase, "She Teaches," rather than "God's word teaches." She can teach anything she wants, but does God's word teach that marriage is made void if a person drinks too much, or if a person raises their voice against you, or a marriage is broken if your husband commits a crime, or if there is a breakdown of trust? These are all things your minister teaches, but that God does not. These things are all from the vain imagination of her heart, not from God's actual recorded teachings. God teaches:

Mark 10:7-12

That's not my minister's personal/private interpretation, that's what Christ Himself taught. That's the authoritative teaching that has been made a mockery of by the church today. Made a mockery of by those who have fallen prey to worldly philosophies and fallen away from the divine authority of the word. To be honest, your minister's 20 golden reasons and exceptions to the prohibition of divorce is a golden calf. It is the wine of the woman that is arrayed in purple and scarlet and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication. Fornication of which there is no exception clause. It's what God sees as spiritual fornication.


Quote
>>>
She doesn't say that these are cases where there should always be a divorce...
<<<

So the "decisions and options" for divorce is left up to each individual and is not prescribed on the pages of God's word? So If someone doesn't trust their husband or wife (your pastor's golden rule #20), they can arbitrarily make the decision to divorce them if they want? I'm sorry but that is not Christianity, that is anarchy, the bondage of the will, something entirely different from Christ's Christianity.

Psalms 50:16-17

There will be God's corporate people doing what is right in their own eyes, and then there are God's corporate people keeping their eyes on the prize and doing what is right in God's eyes. The difference between them is, confirmed "authority" in God's house proven by God's word, and unconfirmed "authority" in man's house proven by man's word.


Quote
>>>
...but these are legitimate reasons where there can be divorce.
<<<

Legitimate reasons to the world, illegitimate to Christ and His followers. We're called Christians because we are those who follow Christ's teachings, not those who abandon them when testing arises. Which seems to have become the definition of Christians in our day concerning most precepts of God. To turn to the right hand and to the left in order to get around what is right in front of them.

Numbers 22:26

Be as the messenger of the Lord and stand in the narrow path teaching that God's people should not turn to the right or the left, but remain on the straight and narrow. We are sent to continue the work of making crooked roads straight in Christ Jesus. What does that mean?

Deuteronomy 5:32

Stand in the narrow path and most importantly, do not either add or take away from the word of God concerning divorce and remarriage. God's word is authoritative and those who convolute it have been warned from Deuteronomy to Revelation (Deuteronomy 4:2 - Revelation 22:18-19). Do not add or take away from God's word. There are dire consequences for those who do.


Quote
>>>
 Irreconcilable Differences..
<<<

That's so all-encompassing--what does that even mean? Does it qualify if she wants a ranch and I want a townhouse? She wants baptism by dunking and I by sprinkling? She thinks dating should start at 15 and I at 17? She likes short skirts and I think it's immoral? She wants a Chevy, and I want a Ford? Good grief, irreconcilable differences means grounds for divorce for anything. ...which necessarily means there is no real prohibition by God against divorce for "any/every reason."  That's pretty much where we are in most churches today. God's word means nothing, it's all about how someone feels. There were irreconcilable differences between man and God and guess what? Christ brought reconciliation to the irreconcilable. Are we not followers of Christ?

Ezekiel 44:23

That's what God's people do. They don't pretend that there is no difference, or that God is happy when you pull asunder what He has clearly commanded never to be pulled asunder. They don't claim that it's showing God's love to profane the marriage covenant by claiming it can be pulled apart for just about anything. The question was answered when the Pharisees asked Christ that very same question. Could there be divorce for any reason?

Matthew 19:3

They were testing him because they knew Moses had written that you could divorce for fornication or unchasteness. They wanted to trap Christin contradicting Moses. Christ did not vacillate, He affirmed that marriage where two people are made one-flesh that is now inseparable. That's what One Flesh means? Correct?  God has been witness to that marriage vow or covenant. There is not one word about divorce for irreconcilable differences, that is simply man's addendum to God's word. An addition, which is a blatant violation of His warnings against such actions. And they shall not go unpunished.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"i acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Nikki on February 03, 2019, 01:59:05 PM
 )amen(  Good posts Tony and Aquatic. Intelligence, sexism and lack of compassion have nothing to do with divorce, remarriage or women having leadership over men.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 07, 2019, 02:53:35 PM
)amen(  Good posts Tony and Aquatic. Intelligence, sexism and lack of compassion have nothing to do with divorce, remarriage or women having leadership over men.

Correct. But that's what happens when social Christianity replaces biblical Christianity in the Church. The word of God is secondary to societal norms and conventions. 20 reasons for divorce is ridiculous, but you'd be surprised at the number of professing Christians who believe in at least 5. Because they spend all their time in the world instead of in the bible.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Betty on February 08, 2019, 12:30:00 AM
Nonsense. Like I said before, sometimes divorce is just inevitable because of irreconcilable differences.

As for Tony Warren claiming there is no exception clause, that's just crazy talk. It's perfectly clear that Jesus says if anyone divorces for anything except fornication. Therefore, there is an exception clause.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Spencer on February 08, 2019, 09:18:01 AM
Deuteronomy 5:32
  • "Ye shall observe to do therefore as the LORD your God hath commanded you: ye shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left."

Stand in the narrow path and most importantly, do not either add or take away from the word of God concerning divorce and remarriage. God's word is authoritative and those who convolute it have been warned from Deuteronomy to Revelation (Deuteronomy 4:2 - Revelation 22:18-19). Do not add or take away from God's word.

Tony,
  Love your answers. But the leading position of churches for the permanence of marriage and no possibility of divorce interprets the exception clause (Matthew 19:9) as referring to fornication during the betrothal period. Why do you not accept that position, rather than the position that you hold for permanence. They agree with you that remarriage is not permitted unless the spouse is deceased. You are only different on the exception clause, though you both come to the same conclusion.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 08, 2019, 05:16:10 PM
Nonsense. Like I said before, sometimes divorce is just inevitable because of irreconcilable differences.

So where is your proof that God allows 20 different reasons for divorce? Or are we to just accept your word for it?

Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 08, 2019, 05:20:32 PM
Hyper-conservative? Is that a bad thing?  I am delighted to be conservative, to preserve the existing doctrines that are testified from God's word, and once handed down by the saints.

Isn't it amazing how some Christians can build a whole doctrine of divorce on the single word "except," and yet can totally ignore all the many other full verses that plainly say that God hates divorce, marriage is for life, remarriage is not permitted, what God has joined together cannot be separated, etc.?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Erik Diamond on February 08, 2019, 07:02:46 PM
Quote from: Betty
As for Tony Warren claiming there is no exception clause, that's just crazy talk. It's perfectly clear that Jesus says if anyone divorces for anything except fornication. Therefore, there is an exception clause.

You (and your female pastor) do not make any sense at all.  You said this after you just listed your ridiculous 20 reasons for divorce (red bold mine):

1. Adultery
2. Fornication <--"Exception"
3. Irreconcilable Differences
4. cheating
5. Mental Illness
6. Desertion
7. Non Support
8. Bigamy
9. Fraud or lying to get into the marriage
10. Criminal activity, conviction or imprisonment
11. Physical abuse
12. Desertion
13. Drug addiction or alcohol abuse
14. Verbal and mental abuse
15. Underage marriage
16. Arranged marriages
17. Impotence
18. Husband no longer loves the wife, or vice versa
19. Incompatibility
20. Breakdown of trust
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Jeff on February 08, 2019, 10:57:11 PM
>>>
"The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" Matthew 19:3
<<<

The word translated every is an unfortunate but accurate translation, as it should have been translated "any." Regardless, every reason "in this context" means any reason.

#1. The Greek word [pas] means all (all = any).
#2. Regardless, "every" by definition means "any"-- i.e., if there is a prohibition against "every reason" for divorce, there is a prohibition against "any reason."
#3. The context that the word is in demands that it be translated "any" since that is the crux of their original question, and their follow up question.

Matthew 19:3
"And some Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?"

Matthew 9:3 (ESV)
 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, ďIs it lawful to divorce oneís wife for any cause?Ē

Tony is correct, they are asking if there can be divorce for any reason. The devout Jews would never ask if there can be divorce for "every" reason. They already know there can't. And that word "every" in that context seems forced.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Stephanie on February 10, 2019, 08:28:02 AM
But then why does God make it so complicated?
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 10, 2019, 11:53:12 AM
>>>
Nonsense. Like I said before, sometimes divorce is just inevitable because of irreconcilable differences.
<<<

You start off with the presupposition that marriage is like mathematics and deals with the equation that one plus one equals two. Therefore you can easily conclude that the two are free to divide for (as you've stated) almost any reason. Or at least he 20 golden reasons you listed. But the faithful stewards of Christ's word (Luke 11:28) accept God's proclamation that in the marriage Vow or Covenant, one plus one equals one where the one joins inseparably with the other. Even as Christ unambiguousluy stated that they are "NO MORE" Two, but one. Therefore, what God has joined together, let not man pull apart. Now where in Christ's words is there any vestige or trace of ambiguity?

Matthew 19:6

They are no longer two anymore, but one, and now being one, inseparable. So in what universe are those words, or their meaning, in the slightest way polysemantic, vague or arguable? One of the most basic rules of sound hermeneutics is that you cannot use one verse to contradict another. One verse may surely "qualify" another verse, but it will never, ever, contradict it. God will never say, I hate divorce, but I give you permission to divorce if you want. He lays down what is His will, not gives you license to do yours. In your scenario, it has to be "if you want" because God didn't "command" divorce. So that would mean it's left up to you. God will never say "what I have joined together you better not pull it apart," but you can pull it apart if you personally find fornication unforgivable. God doesn't work like that.

Matthew 18:32-33

Good question. And your answer is what? That you can't forgive seven times seventy because your pride would be too hurt? Do you know that every time we sin as the bride of Christ, we are committing spiritual fornication against Christ? And yet there is never divorce from being His bride because we do not remain the bride of Christ by our faithfulness, but by His. Selah. Why do you suppose the Lord uses the Husband/Wife relationship to represent His unconditional Covenant of love for His bride? Coincidence? Will Christ ever divorce us when we are unfaithful to Him? Never, because the New Covenant Marriage we are in is unconditional.

In the Old Covenant, Moses, for the hardness of their heart, and as "representation" of a "Conditional Covenant," permitted divorce for fornication. In the New Testament, Christ, despite the hardness of our hearts, and as a representation of a "Unconditional Covenant," does not permit divorce. Even as He will not divorce His bride for her unfaithfulness or fornications. This is what God had always intended in a marriage as a representation of this unbreakable union, even from the beginning. Now is that truth realized in Christ Jesus. Selah.

So when you say "sometimes divorce is just inevitable because of irreconcilable differences," I retort that in Christ Jesus, there is no such thing as irreconcilable differences. Because all our sins were forgiven, and reconciliation is for every transgression. We don't start off with the presupposition that our differences are irreconcilable, a Christian should start off with the preposition that:

Mark 10:27

i.e., if Christ thought like we do about unfaithfulness in marriage, then no one could be saved.  The truth is, we are "commanded" not to divide in divorce, what has been joined together by God. Start out with the law that there cannot be divorce, and differences will be worked out. Even as they were for thousands of years "before" the plague of divorce and remarriage manifested itself in modern society.

"There never was a marriage that could not have failed, and there never was a marriage that could not have succeeded." -WiseManSay

Christian marriages fail because one (or most likely both) parties violate God's laws. Husbands love your wives and treat them with respect and honor, and wives love your husbands and submit to him as head. When both fail, the failure of marriage becomes inevitable only because of this violation of God's laws. Despite proclamations to the contrary, usually, there is no "innocent party." Since Christian divorce was rare until relatively recently, obviously this is a new phenomenon brought on by violations of God's laws, and compromises by God's Ministers.


Quote
>>>
As for Tony Warren claiming there is no exception clause, that's just crazy talk. It's perfectly clear that Jesus says if anyone divorces for anything except fornication. Therefore, there is an exception clause.
<<<

There is an exception, but not for allowing divorce for fornication as you suppose. Divorce for fornication is unlawful, and divorce for anything beside fornication is unlawful. That is the exception. Thus Christ has covered all bases. Both divorce for fornication, and divorce for anything except, or literally  [if not] fornication. Or to put it more succinctly and withoutr exception, as Christ did in Mark chapter 10, there is to be no divorce period, as Moses once allowed for fornication/uncleanness/illicit nakedness. Tell me if you see anything in these words about an exception to allow divorce for fornication?

Mark 10:2-12
list]
The Pharisees come to test Christ and ask Him can they divorce their wives, and Christ says no, and explains why Moses allowed it. He then reiterates no divorce and no remarriage, making sure everyone understands exactly what he is saying. NO DIVORCE PERIOD! Scrutinize every word there. Mark, under divine inspiration of God, has put it very plainly and informatively that though Moses gave a writing of divorce for fornication, that was never what God wanted for His people from the beginning. He wants no divorce for any reason, period. Of course, even His disciples thinking out loud that if that is the case, it's better for men not to ever get married at all. Because they (unlike the church today) understood fully that Christ was saying you can't divorce for any reason.

...which by the way, was the actual question that was asked in Matthew 19.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"i acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 10, 2019, 12:17:16 PM
>>>
Tony,
  Love your answers. But the leading position of churches for the permanence of marriage and no possibility of divorce interprets the exception clause (Matthew 19:9) as referring to fornication during the betrothal period. Why do you not accept that position, rather than the position that you hold for the permanence of marriage.
<<<

Greetings Spencer,
    That has long been a highly disseminated idea in some Christian circles. But the reason that I don't agree with it because this position is based upon Jewish secular history, tradition, speculation and supposition, rather than on the Bible "alone" and in its entirety. The whole foundation of this hypothesis rests on the hypothesis that Christ was referring only to the betrothal period, and not the period after consummation or confirmation of the marriage. There is no Biblical proof or warrant for that. But they look to secular Jewish tradition, writings and history to fill in the blanks. That is not a sound way to interpret scripture. The main problem I see with that idea is that "the word of God" doesn't say "nor even imply" this.

Moreover, this idea necessarily implies that the marriage betrothal was not really a actual marriage. Otherwise, they couldn't separate that betrothal period where they believe it theoretically allows for divorce, from the actual marriage afterward. Again, the problem I have with that is that nowhere in the Bible does it ever state that this betrothal is not actual marriage (e.g. Marry and Joseph) where a divorce could lawfully take place. And it contradicts the fact that they were actually married because a divorce was needed to separate them. You see what I'm saying? There's only one kind of marriage. Either you are married or you are not married. There is no marriage with a chance of divorce, and marriage without the chance of divorce. The whole idea is fatally flawed IMHO. I believe that true biblical exegesis "requires" getting our beliefs from "out of" the Bible, not the eisegesis of reading things "into the" Bible simply because we can't find the Biblical answers.


I don't hold to that view because it basically assumes Christ is saying, you can divorce from a legitimate marriage for fornication, except when you are in a legitimate marriage after you've slept together. That makes no sense. Because there is nothing that would lead anyone to speculate a Jewish betrothal was anything but a legitimate marriage. On the contrary, otherwise, why would anyone need a divorce? Christ never in all of scripture separates marriage into separate betrothal and after Betrothal laws. Betrothals were actual marriages in those days. It was a marriage "Vow" or covenant before God of joining together two into one. That's the exact reason why Joseph, who was betrothed to Mary, had a mind to divorce her when he "supposed" she had been unfaithful when she was with child of the Holy Ghost. Betrothal wasn't a simi-marriage, it was an actual marriage that by the law of Moses "required" divorce to be loosed. Joseph thought to divorce her by the Old testament law that Moses wrote for divorce for fornication. EXACTLY what Joseph, who was betrothed to Mary, had thought that Mary was guilty of. This same fornication! This again makes the point I have been saying here that the law that Moses gave for divorce was for fornication. Selah.

Matthew 1:18-20

This was the law of divorce for fornication that Moses had written. There is no other law for divorce. So how could Christ have been saying in Matthew 19 that this law of Moses for divorce for fornication was voided, and also be saying they could divorce for fornication? It makes no sense because it's not true.

But I digress.

The point is, their idea of permanence only after betrothal is pure speculation because Christ doesn't say if you are bethrothed (like Joseph was) you are free to divorce. He wasn't saying that the law of Moses stands, He was saying just the opposite. Nor does any law of God in the New Testament state this. Indeed, it says just the opposite over and over again. Marriage is until death do us part. When Married, you are no more two but one, so that man cannot separate. So this idea of an exception to allow for divorce for fornication of the betrothed only, is IMHO from the minds and traditions of men, not from the written word of God. Christian doctrines should be based solely upon Scriptura, not the ideas handed down from Jewish or non-Jewish historians, from educated guesses, assumption, hypothesis, or the suppositions of uninspired theologians. This position contradicts not only Christ's One-Flesh rule when betrothed, but also His perfectly clear teaching that the law that Moses gave was not to be held, and was only given because of the hardness of their heart.


Quote
>>>
 They agree with you that remarriage is not permitted unless the spouse is deceased. You are only different on the exception clause, though you both come to the same conclusion.
<<<

Coming to the same conclusion is all well and good. But it is also important that we come to conclusions regarding Biblical teachings "by Scripture," and not by osmosis or effusion. This is the process of gradual or unconscious assimilation of foreign ideas, interpretations and knowledge "into" the Bible. Not saying these Christians are bad people (God Forbid), just that we have to be careful that we get our interpretations from "within" the Bible, not outside of it.

2nd Timothy 2:15

I believe that the metaphor is from a steward rightly cutting and distributing fairly. i.e., that we understand the bread that God has given us justly, honorably, righteously, interpreting God's word by God's word. Not by the words, speculations or traditions of men. Even as the "more honorable" Bereans did in Acts 17:11. That they received what Paul was teaching, comparing it with the Holy Scriptures rather than their Jewish leader's words, and therefore many of them came to truth.


"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"i acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Tony Warren on February 10, 2019, 12:46:37 PM
>>>
But then why does God make it so complicated?
<<<

Stephanie,
    First, as we know, God has a sovereign right to complicate any part of His word that He deems necessary for multiple reasons, not the least being:

Proverbs 25:2

Second, is God's edict that "what He joins together should never be pulled apart" really so complicated that man can't understand it? Or is it more accurate to say that God leaves man just enough rope to hang himself (so to speak)? There is always a place in the word that the self-willed will see as either manipulatable or non-authoritative, and thus stumble or be snared, blindly caught in their own will rather than surrender to God's will.

1st Peter 2:8

Why did they stumble at the word? God says it is because they were disobedient. In other words, they just didn't want to "keep" or guard against loss God's truths. A lack of obeying God's unadulterated word is not an accident, nor as innocent as we would like to believe. The heart of man is desperately wicked, who can know it.  I believe the decree or law against divorce seems complicated to many because man flesh and is always looking for loopholes that will allow him to do his own will. It is really not because it's actually sooooo difficult to understand. i.e., the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. It seems complicated because we're struggling with acceptance or because God hasn't revealed that particular truth to us yet. Otherwise, it is the same reason God has always spoken to His people in types, parables, mysteries, maxims, symbols, proverbs, analogies and riddles.

Luke 8:10

To some it is hard to understand, however, having Spiritual eyes, was it really so "unclear" that Jesus was the Christ or Messiah that was spoken of as coming in the Old Testament? Or was it just that they were determined to do their own will because God never opened their spiritual eyes that they could see what was clearly in front of them? Indeed, with the Spirit of truth revealing it to us, we might say "how could they miss it?" Is it that the word is so complicated that Roman Catholics cannot understand that God's word is the ultimate authority over the church, and not the Pope? Or is it that their allegiance and will is to the church, and not to the Living WORD, Christ? Likewise, is the command of God that we are to be bound together as one flesh until death parts us soooo complicated? Or is it really just a case of man's will versus God's will? I submit to you that unless God through His comforting Spirit reveals these truths to His professing servants, Scripture will always seem more complicated than it really is. Thus mankind will always find reasons to doubt that Jesus is the Christ and Savior, that the world was created in 6 literal days, that Revelation chapter 12 is not to be understood literally, that God is sovereign and the unsaved don't have free will to come to Him, and that divorce is clearly not allowed. Not for one reason, three reasons, not for "any" reason that our vain imaginations can dream up. The point being, the Lord's prayer reads:

"Thy Kingdom Come, Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven..."

Because we still live in this robe of flesh, some will always view that as meaning "My" will be done in earth. Remember, professing Christians can't just say God's word is not true (and still claim to be a Christian), and so he looks at it as too complicated, or he will convolute it, obfuscate it, or even feign being obtuse concerning any clear Scriptures presented to him contradicting what is his will to believe--either consciously or unconsciously. But none of man's rationalizations are hidden from God. Those still in unbelief or in self-justification are often fond of saying, "God knows my heart." Unfortunately for many, indeed (Hebrews 4:12-13) He does. He knows the heart of man is desperately wicked.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"i acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Halle on February 11, 2019, 05:03:52 AM
Moreover, this idea necessarily implies that the marriage betrothal was not really a actual marriage. Otherwise, they couldn't separate that betrothal period where they believe it theoretically allows for divorce, from the actual marriage afterward. Again, the problem I have with that is that nowhere in the Bible does it ever state that this betrothal is not actual marriage (e.g. Marry and Joseph) where a divorce could lawfully take place. And it contradicts the fact that they were actually married because a divorce was needed to separate them. You see what I'm saying? There's only one kind of marriage. Either you are married or you are not married. There is no marriage with a chance of divorce, and marriage without the chance of divorce.

 )Goodpoint(  )Bible-Red(  ]ThUmBsUp[ ]ThUmBsUp[ ]ThUmBsUp[ ]ThUmBsUp[ ]ThUmBsUp[ ]ThUmBsUp[

Your point about Joseph and Mary was on Point!
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Trevor on February 11, 2019, 07:50:51 AM
 )ditto(  Agree, outstanding point! A marriage is a marriage according to scripture, even if called a betrothal or espousal. If it requires divorce, then it is the marriage that God said cannot be separated by divorce. There aren't two types of marriages just as there aren't two types of divorces. I understand that according to some theologians there are, but not according to scripture. As usual, Tony makes an excellent point countering this view of selective permanence.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Reformer on February 11, 2019, 05:05:31 PM
 )cLaPpInGg( Silence cannot by itself establish a Scriptural principle. Any conclusion that there are different types of marital joinings that is based purely on outside sources and assumptions brought to the text are arguments drawn from the silence of the critical texts. And we know that type of defense for Christian doctrine is unbiblical.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Hammerle Labinowic on February 11, 2019, 06:27:58 PM


I recommend
The Great Divorce Controversy
by E S Williams (Author)
Pages 461, hard cover, 22 illustrations, ISBN 0 9529939 3 7
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Wanda on February 12, 2019, 03:25:29 AM
Quote from: Betty
My minister is a minister of love and shows compassion for those who, by no fault of their own, have fallen into bad marriages. She teaches that there are 20 golden reasons and exceptions to the prohibition of divorce.

Your minister is a woman?


As are so many today, and so many more male ministers justifying it also. Signs of the times.
Title: Re: Marriage And Divorce
Post by: Terry on February 13, 2019, 05:27:34 AM
Quote from: Betty

She teaches that there are 20 golden reasons and exceptions to the prohibition of divorce.
Your minister is a woman?
Signs of the times.

 )iagree(  Signs of the Times. The blood moon.