Which Authority Structure is over issues concerning MDR?

[4Christ]

"Put away" versus "divorce" in Mosaic law does not seem to have one bit of relevance to today.  By law, one cannot put away a wife and marry someone else.  It is called "bigamy" is it not?

Why all this reference to the Mosaic law?  We are not under the law but under grace.  IMHO, divorce is an evil in most instances.  I am not speaking about those who are divorced against their will.  I'm speaking of frivolous divorces that destroy a spouse and children.  This is all foolishness and vanity.  Jesus took us back to creation when He spoke on divorce.  Why can't we as christians just obey the will of God? 

[Sherman Nobles]

"Put away" versus "divorce" in Mosaic law does not seem to have one bit of relevance to today.  By law, one cannot put away a wife and marry someone else.  It is called "bigamy" is it not?

Why all this reference to the Mosaic law?  We are not under the law but under grace.  IMHO, divorce is an evil in most instances.  I am not speaking about those who are divorced against their will.  I'm speaking of frivolous divorces that destroy a spouse and children.  This is all foolishness and vanity.  Jesus took us back to creation when He spoke on divorce.  Why can't we as christians just obey the will of God? 

Good morning 4Christ,

"Put away" vs "divorce" only has importance for us today if Jesus' words have importance for us today.  In the few passages where Jesus uses the word "apoluo", it makes a world of difference for the meaning/interpretation of the verse whether He is speaking of legal divorce or illegal seperation.  If "apoluo" can only mean "illegal seperation" unless the bill of divorce is specifically mentioned, then Jesus is not speaking of legal divorce at all in these passages.  As noted previously, I believe that "apoluo" can mean either and should be determined by the context. 

You said "By law, one cannot put away a wife and marry someone else.  It is called "bigamy" is it not?"  Short answer, no, that's incorrect.  In NT times, polygamy was still legal and practiced in Israel, thus a man could either divorce or illegally seperate from one wife and yet marry other women if he chose to do so. Or he could marry other women and then either divorce or expell his previous wife or wives.  Polygamy is still practiced in the Middle East today in Arabic cultures.  Is polygamy moral or immoral, that's for another discussion.  Regardless of whether it's moral or immoral, it's against the law in many countries.

"Why all this reference to the Mosaic Law?"  Because in order to understand what Jesus said, it helps to understand the culture in which He spoke.  The less one understands the culture, the more likely that one is to misinterpret what Jesus said.  The more one understands the culture, the more likely one is to correctly interpret what Jesus said.  The Mosaic Law is a key element of the historical, cultural, literary, and even authorial context of the passages in question. 

When you say that "we're not under law but under grace," you're not saying that because of grace we can now live any way we want.  But then on the other hand, concerning divorce, if the Law allowed for divorce, how can the requirements of Grace be harder than the Law?  And yet, that's what the traditional doctrine teaches - that now under Grace MDR is held to a higher standard than under the Law.  Frankly, this crazy-talk is the result of misunderstanding what Jesus said concerning MDR.

Of course, frivolous divorce is evil and the church should do all we can to empower people to have lasting loving relationships; but it's not our place to sit in condemning judgement of others who have been divorced or are even contemplating divorce.  And though a person frivolously divorces his/her spouse, there is still forgiveness in God. 

Frankly, the traditional doctrine has weakened marriages and bind many people in the sins of the past.  For example, I don't know how many Christian divorce'es are pinning away, waiting for their "husbands" to come back to them though their "husbands" have remarried and moved on in other relationships.  They say these men are their "husbands", but these men are no longer their "husbands", they are their "ex-husbands"; the marriage bond was broken by divorce - regardless of the reason for the divorce (moral or immoral).  The marriage is over.

Not only that, but if they are longing for their ex-husbands to come back to them and their ex-husbands have remarried, they are actually committing adultery - lusting in their hearts after another woman's husband.  Thus, the traditional doctrine, by teaching that marriage is indissoluble, has bound some people in sin. 

Marriage is breakable, not indissoluble.  Now, it shouldn't be broken, but it can be broken for both morall and immoral reasons.  And though a divorce is motivated by "frivolous" reasons, it is still a divorce, the legal breaking of a marriage union.  The reason Jesus mentioned the Garden of Eden, was to point the Pharisees back to the way things should be. Their focus was on controlling people via law rather than empowering people via the Spirit.  We need to empower people to have godly relationships and lasting loving marriages, and we, the church, need to quite trying to control people through errant doctrine, teaching things that are not true.  Marriage is breakable, not indissoluble; but we all long for lasting loving relationships. Therefore we need to do all we can to protect existing marriages, bring healing to sick marriages, and help people bury dead marriages.  But the traditional doctrine hasn't helped in any of that.

"Why can't we Christians just obey God?" - Because we all sin and fall short of the glory of God and are thus dependent upon His grace.

Understanding Jesus' words reveal that:  Marriage is breakable (though men shouldn't break their marriages).  Marriage and especially divorce are under "civil" authority as delegated by God scripturally and not under "church" authority. And though it should be considered "sacred" by Christians, marriage is not a sacrament; marriage is a human (not a divine) covenant that is only as strong as the character of the covenantors.   

[Sherman Nobles]

Another thought concerning the use of "apoluo".  As mentioned previously, apoluo is a compound word of "apo" (from) and "luo" (to loose or set free).  Paul uses a conjugate of "luo" in 1 Cor.7:27-28, when he says that if you are bound (deo) to a wife, seek not to be loosed (luo).  The literary context of the verse strongly emplies that Paul is speaking of legal divorce, especially since he goes on to say that if one has been loosed (luo) from a wife (divorced), he should not seek a wife but if he does marry he does not sin. 

So this verse not only shows the word "luo" used to mean divorce, but it also says that divorce's may remarry without sin (apparently aside from any connection to the reason for the previous divorce, or at least non is mentioned).

The problem is divorce, not remarriage; though if one reads Jesus' words non-critically (without thinking), then it would seem that the issue is remarriage.

[4Christ]

The problem is divorce, not remarriage; though if one reads Jesus' words non-critically (without thinking), then it would seem that the issue is remarriage.

If the problem is divorce, then God had a problem.  He did indeed divorce the nation of Israel.  Yet, He calls her back again and again and again.  He even made a New Covenant that includes her.  The thing that God has never done is take a new "wife".

This is the truth of MDR.  Divorce if you must for fornication.  But do not take another as long as there is the possibility of healing and restoration.  And if we are obedient...and we seek the Lord with all our heart, soul, mind, and body, as He commands every believer; He will restore.

If reconciliation becomes impossible, the spouse remarries or dies; then remarriage is an option.  This is how I see it in the word of God.  With our God, the blood of Jesus and His righteousness, and the power of the Holy Spirit; there is no way that any believer can say he or she is not able to reconcile, IMHO.  Can our God fail?  No.  And saying NO, but we can is a willingness to yield to the flesh instead of the Spirit.

[Sherman Nobles]

4Christ, so, though the Word of God specifically says that if a divorce' remarries, it is not sin, you believe that it is sinful for a divorce' to remarry, except for fornication.

Concerning the analogy of God divorcing Israel, Jer.3.8, if you read the passage closely, God is calling Judah (Israel's) sister to repentance. If she doesn't quit messing around, He will divorce her like He did Israel.  So, though He divorced Israel, He was married to another (Judah).

Using biblical metaphors to "prove" anything other than what they are explicitly meant to communicate is not wise.  In that passage, God is using a common familial metaphor to call Judah to repent and become faithful to Him; to attempt to use it to "prove" anything else would be an unwise handling or use of the Word of God.

Of course, you're more than welcome to remain single if you wish, because you personally believe that's what God would have you do.  And I realize that the traditional doctrine of marriage errantly teaches that marriage after divorce is wrong.  But that's not what a thorough deliberative study of the Word reveals. 

Sin leads to death, physical and relational.  Frankly, to teach that divorce's may not remarry falls in line with what Paul said was a doctrine of demons.

"Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry," I Tim. 4:1-3a.  NKJV

The apostle Paul, though encouraging all singles (virgins, widows, widowers, and divorce's) to remain single (agamos), was very specific to point out that if a divorce' remarries, he does not sin. 

The apostle Paul was also careful to use two different words when quoting what Jesus said concerning divorce/separation.  1 Cor.7.10-11,

"Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart (chorizo) from her husband. But even if she does depart (chorizo), let her remain unmarried (agamos) or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce (apheimi) his wife." 

So, considering that in Israel, women could not legally divorce their husbands, and could only leave, separate from them. If a woman did leave (chorizo) her husband she was still legally married, could not legally marry another, and should remain single. 

But the man was given no such command, why? For a few reasons:
1. Polygamy was still practised and accepted during NT times.
2. Men in Israel could legally divorce their wives, and thus if they chose to divorce their spouses, there was nothing legal against them marrying other women.

When Paul translated and applied to his Greco-Roman audience what Jesus said in a Jewish context, he used "apheimi" for both men and women because according to Greco-Roman civil law, either men or women could inact divorce.  Paul also did not repeat the command to women to remain single, why? Because in that culture if a woman left her husband it ennacted a legal divorce, as much as if a man left his wife. 

We run into problems when we disregard the cultural context of the Word.  It was written in a specific historical, cultural context; and to ignore such is not wise.

Frivolous divorce and even divorces based on morally acceptable reasons are tragic, but that's no reason for the church to try and bind people to their past and not allow them to move on through arbitrarily and unscripturally saying that divorce's may not remarry.  Rather, let's focus on empowering people to make a go of their marriages, whether it's their 1st, 2nd, 3rd,.....or 10th. 

[SammySmile]

Sherman,

Thanks for taking the time to post on this very difficult issue.  It's obvious that the Lord speaks to you and through you.

Divorce is a fact of this life.  Like all sad events, it leads to a great deal of guilt and condemnation.  Add to this the heavy burden that improper Biblical interpretation creates, the end result is untold misery.  How many ignorant are out there who stay blindly in a hopeless state of marriage while they're children are being abused because the pastor says it's God's will?  How many foolish people are sentenced to lives of singlehood due to self-righteous or just misguided pastors who feel that all remarriage is adultery?  How many Christians embrace a false sense of accomplishment by remaining single, waiting for some opportune time when the ex-husband or wife is somehow caught in the act to free them to remarry without guilt?  This is all foolishness and vanity conceived in the heart of sinful man!

When will God's Word be properly divided on this issue to bring freedom to those in bondage to the traditions of men?

[SammySmile]

The problem is divorce, not remarriage; though if one reads Jesus' words non-critically (without thinking), then it would seem that the issue is remarriage.

If the problem is divorce, then God had a problem.  He did indeed divorce the nation of Israel.  Yet, He calls her back again and again and again.  He even made a New Covenant that includes her.  The thing that God has never done is take a new "wife".

This is the truth of MDR.  Divorce if you must for fornication.  But do not take another as long as there is the possibility of healing and restoration.  And if we are obedient...and we seek the Lord with all our heart, soul, mind, and body, as He commands every believer; He will restore.

If reconciliation becomes impossible, the spouse remarries or dies; then remarriage is an option.  This is how I see it in the word of God.  With our God, the blood of Jesus and His righteousness, and the power of the Holy Spirit; there is no way that any believer can say he or she is not able to reconcile, IMHO.  Can our God fail?  No.  And saying NO, but we can is a willingness to yield to the flesh instead of the Spirit.

4Christ,

The Lord does not restore every marriage.  The Lord does not violate free will.  That was why God instituted divorce in the Bible.  And regardless of the traditional doctrines that have been promulgated, divorce is the termination of a marriage regardless of the reasons for the divorce.  The belief that a remarriage is illegitimate because it's improper is an unbiblical concept that is from improper interpretation of Jesus' words in the gospels.  Please don't make the mistake of believing that remarriages should be dissolved to restore former ones.  That is a wolf in sheep's clothing.  As Sherman has cited, the proper cultural and historical context is needed to understand Jesus' words. 

Even if a divorce and remarriage is an adulterous act, Jesus was certainly not saying the person remarried is living in some constant state of adultery, and he certainly was not advocating breaking up remarriages to run after former spouses.  Such activity is evil to the core and bad theology in every sense.

Take it to heart, please, and be blessed. 

[Serenity432001]

Doesn't this whole issue boil down to 1. all have sinned and fallen short and 2. there is forgiveness in the Lord Jesus Christ?  Those are the two points that make me question how this whole "scriptural divorce" even came about.  Sure, there are some who may appear "more guilty" than others and there may be "an innocent party" but not when it comes to sin in general for all have fallen short and all have access to Christ forgiveness.  Those things seem to not apply to divorce for some reason and I just really don't get that.

[Sherman Nobles]

Serenity,

You actually touch on a very important point, how the traditional doctrine of MDR was birthed. During the time of Christ and for the 1st Century church, MDR was understood to be primarily under personal authority with little civil oversight.  Then the great divide came, the Judiazing believers sowed seeds of division in the church. Because of Jewish uprisings, Rome stepped up it's oppression of the Jews, especially those in Israel.  The Gospel was exploding in the Greco-Roman world and in Jewish communities outside Israel. But in Israel, the Jews persecuted the Jewish Christians.

When Rome stepped up oppression of Israel and Jews throughout the Empire, the Gentile Christians quickly forsook their Jewish roots and wished to no longer be seen as a Jewish sect, as it was in the first 40 or 5o years of the church; they did not want to be aligned with the Jews who were causing so much trouble for the Empire in Israel.  Sadly, the Jewish Christians were oppressed by the Romans for being Jews and they were persecuted by the Jews for being Christians. 

War engulfed Palestine.  Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed in AD 70.  Fifty years later, AD 120, Bar-Kochba was labeled the Messiah by Rabbi Akiva and led another revolt against Rome.  Rome squelched the rebellion, and built a new city called Aelia in Jerusalem's place.  On the temple site was erected another "temple

[4Christ]

The problem is divorce, not remarriage; though if one reads Jesus' words non-critically (without thinking), then it would seem that the issue is remarriage.

If the problem is divorce, then God had a problem.  He did indeed divorce the nation of Israel.  Yet, He calls her back again and again and again.  He even made a New Covenant that includes her.  The thing that God has never done is take a new "wife".

This is the truth of MDR.  Divorce if you must for fornication.  But do not take another as long as there is the possibility of healing and restoration.  And if we are obedient...and we seek the Lord with all our heart, soul, mind, and body, as He commands every believer; He will restore.

If reconciliation becomes impossible, the spouse remarries or dies; then remarriage is an option.  This is how I see it in the word of God.  With our God, the blood of Jesus and His righteousness, and the power of the Holy Spirit; there is no way that any believer can say he or she is not able to reconcile, IMHO.  Can our God fail?  No.  And saying NO, but we can is a willingness to yield to the flesh instead of the Spirit.

4Christ,

The Lord does not restore every marriage.  The Lord does not violate free will.  That was why God instituted divorce in the Bible.  And regardless of the traditional doctrines that have been promulgated, divorce is the termination of a marriage regardless of the reasons for the divorce.  The belief that a remarriage is illegitimate because it's improper is an unbiblical concept that is from improper interpretation of Jesus' words in the gospels.  Please don't make the mistake of believing that remarriages should be dissolved to restore former ones.  That is a wolf in sheep's clothing.  As Sherman has cited, the proper cultural and historical context is needed to understand Jesus' words. 

Even if a divorce and remarriage is an adulterous act, Jesus was certainly not saying the person remarried is living in some constant state of adultery, and he certainly was not advocating breaking up remarriages to run after former spouses.  Such activity is evil to the core and bad theology in every sense.

Take it to heart, please, and be blessed. 

I will not take to heart what is so wrong in this world and unfortunately in God's Church.  We want to include God in "marriage" when it is beneficial for us to do so.  We pick and choose what we will believe in His word as if we are picking ripe fruit in a grocery store.  And we cannot ever say that God "created" or even "mandated" divorce.  He did not.  Man did that, not God.  History repeats itself.  Men have been marrying and divorcing and remarrying since the days of Moses.  It is man's sinful, hardened, and rebellious heart that made the regulations for divorce necessary by Moses. 

Jesus is the Master, Lord, and King.  You can't serve mammoth and God.  You will love one and hate the other.  This is what has happened.  We try to love the ways of the world in MDR, but we are not of the world.  Divorce and remarriage comes about because of hard hearts, rebellion against God.  There is no way to justify the destructiveness of it.  Did you know the divorce rates were coming down?  But it is not because people are becoming obedient to God, NO, they are becoming more disobedient - defiant even.  Now people have just decided to "shack up".  This is the way to handle the rising destruction of marriages and children's lives - fornicate! 

Jesus says there is a way that seems right unto a man.  But that way leads to destruction.  It's time to preach the truth of the gospel.  Rev 3:19  As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

Luk 13:3  I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

[SammySmile]

The problem is divorce, not remarriage; though if one reads Jesus' words non-critically (without thinking), then it would seem that the issue is remarriage.

If the problem is divorce, then God had a problem.  He did indeed divorce the nation of Israel.  Yet, He calls her back again and again and again.  He even made a New Covenant that includes her.  The thing that God has never done is take a new "wife".

This is the truth of MDR.  Divorce if you must for fornication.  But do not take another as long as there is the possibility of healing and restoration.  And if we are obedient...and we seek the Lord with all our heart, soul, mind, and body, as He commands every believer; He will restore.

If reconciliation becomes impossible, the spouse remarries or dies; then remarriage is an option.  This is how I see it in the word of God.  With our God, the blood of Jesus and His righteousness, and the power of the Holy Spirit; there is no way that any believer can say he or she is not able to reconcile, IMHO.  Can our God fail?  No.  And saying NO, but we can is a willingness to yield to the flesh instead of the Spirit.

4Christ,

The Lord does not restore every marriage.  The Lord does not violate free will.  That was why God instituted divorce in the Bible.  And regardless of the traditional doctrines that have been promulgated, divorce is the termination of a marriage regardless of the reasons for the divorce.  The belief that a remarriage is illegitimate because it's improper is an unbiblical concept that is from improper interpretation of Jesus' words in the gospels.  Please don't make the mistake of believing that remarriages should be dissolved to restore former ones.  That is a wolf in sheep's clothing.  As Sherman has cited, the proper cultural and historical context is needed to understand Jesus' words. 

Even if a divorce and remarriage is an adulterous act, Jesus was certainly not saying the person remarried is living in some constant state of adultery, and he certainly was not advocating breaking up remarriages to run after former spouses.  Such activity is evil to the core and bad theology in every sense.

Take it to heart, please, and be blessed. 

I will not take to heart what is so wrong in this world and unfortunately in God's Church.  We want to include God in "marriage" when it is beneficial for us to do so.  We pick and choose what we will believe in His word as if we are picking ripe fruit in a grocery store.  And we cannot ever say that God "created" or even "mandated" divorce.  He did not.  Man did that, not God.  History repeats itself.  Men have been marrying and divorcing and remarrying since the days of Moses.  It is man's sinful, hardened, and rebellious heart that made the regulations for divorce necessary by Moses. 

Jesus is the Master, Lord, and King.  You can't serve mammoth and God.  You will love one and hate the other.  This is what has happened.  We try to love the ways of the world in MDR, but we are not of the world.  Divorce and remarriage comes about because of hard hearts, rebellion against God.  There is no way to justify the destructiveness of it.  Did you know the divorce rates were coming down?  But it is not because people are becoming obedient to God, NO, they are becoming more disobedient - defiant even.  Now people have just decided to "shack up".  This is the way to handle the rising destruction of marriages and children's lives - fornicate! 

Jesus says there is a way that seems right unto a man.  But that way leads to destruction.  It's time to preach the truth of the gospel.  Rev 3:19  As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

Luk 13:3  I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

4Christ,

Truth in God is only found in the proper dividing of His Word.  Hardness of heart is from man, but freedom from marriage is an ordinance given by God and governed by civil law.
Your view is esoteric.  How many spouses and children suffer due to submission to the traditional doctrine?  An untold multitude.  Antidivorce doctrine is not the answer.  It's a relationship with the Lord that leads to repentance.
 

[4Christ]

I am not antidivorce.  There are situations when divorce is the only answer.  A woman who lives in a state who seeks to escape from abuse, may not have the option of separation if divorce is only offered in that state.  A person who violates the marriage covenant by having sex with someone other than his/her spouse may not be able to get past the betrayal in that and seek a divorce.

There are biblical reasons given whereby a person may obtain a divorce.  I'm not disputing that because Jesus said it. 

The problem I have is that when the truth of the matter is told, only 9% of the divorces granted in this country are due to adultery.  "No fault" divorce has all but eliminated the need to even prove anything.  We have a nation that has taken marriage (the cornerstone of the family) and torn what God intended asunder.  And the church of the Lord Jesus Christ is right "in there" with it.  What did Jesus say?  Why do we need man to interpret for us what the word of God says?  If we are in Christ and He in us, He shows and leads us into all truth.  There may be "some" truth in what is being said in favor of divorce - but I see it just the way it was in the days of Moses.  Men and women following the lusts of the flesh instead of the Spirit of the Living God.

[Serenity432001]

We are told not to gossip.  Yet I see it everyday in Christians everywhere(including myself)  We are told not to lie yet it happens quite often in those of us even who profess Christ.  There is sin in marriage because it involves two individuals who sin.  Now don't get me wrong, it is good to strive to live a sinless life as Christ did and it's good to strive to have a healthy, God-fearing marriage but the truth of the matter is we can not control anothers behaviour and there are times when staying in a marriage is destructive and harmful and I know some will say well in extreme cases its okay to get out of the marriage but when such stigma and harsh ideas are put on divorce it becomes difficult for abused people to be able to get out of that when they've been made to believe that unless some exact criteria is met they must be alone for the rest of their life. 

I agree with SammySmile here, " It's a relationship with the Lord that leads to repentance."   As I have my own relationship with the Lord and lead by example then I can be of maximum service to my fellow.

[SammySmile]

I am not antidivorce.  There are situations when divorce is the only answer.  A woman who lives in a state who seeks to escape from abuse, may not have the option of separation if divorce is only offered in that state.  A person who violates the marriage covenant by having sex with someone other than his/her spouse may not be able to get past the betrayal in that and seek a divorce.

There are biblical reasons given whereby a person may obtain a divorce.  I'm not disputing that because Jesus said it. 

The problem I have is that when the truth of the matter is told, only 9% of the divorces granted in this country are due to adultery.  "No fault" divorce has all but eliminated the need to even prove anything.  We have a nation that has taken marriage (the cornerstone of the family) and torn what God intended asunder.  And the church of the Lord Jesus Christ is right "in there" with it.  What did Jesus say?  Why do we need man to interpret for us what the word of God says?  If we are in Christ and He in us, He shows and leads us into all truth.  There may be "some" truth in what is being said in favor of divorce - but I see it just the way it was in the days of Moses.  Men and women following the lusts of the flesh instead of the Spirit of the Living God.

4HIm,

The problem with folks which hold to the traditional doctrine is they don't seek to look beyond the black and white print in our English Bible to decipher the true teachings of Christ on this issue.  Folks tend to create certain parameters about "acceptable" and "nonacceptable" reasons for divorce, and this just makes no sense.  This could not possibly be what Jesus was doing because he would be contradicting what He already said in the Old Testament, it would make Paul's letter to the Corinthians missing the boat entirely, and it would in essence be placing people in ridiculous positions of waiting to catch another in illicit sex.  The truth is that the "no divorce except for cases of adultery" doesn't really pass the litmus test of theological scrutiny.  What violates the marital covenant is a long, long list of offenses which doesn't begin nor end with sexual unfaithfulness.  I'm not minimizing adultery.  I'm just saying that is not the issue Christ was addressing. 

[zoonance]

Most of us would not truly gasp at the divorce rate in the world, but we should at the divorce rate in the church (between 'christians')


Some of us, however, would gasp at how the church handles previously worldly converts affected by MDR.

[normfromga]

I am not antidivorce.  There are situations when divorce is the only answer.  A woman who lives in a state who seeks to escape from abuse, may not have the option of separation if divorce is only offered in that state.  A person who violates the marriage covenant by having sex with someone other than his/her spouse may not be able to get past the betrayal in that and seek a divorce.

There are biblical reasons given whereby a person may obtain a divorce.  I'm not disputing that because Jesus said it. 

The problem I have is that when the truth of the matter is told, only 9% of the divorces granted in this country are due to adultery.  "No fault" divorce has all but eliminated the need to even prove anything.  We have a nation that has taken marriage (the cornerstone of the family) and torn what God intended asunder.  And the church of the Lord Jesus Christ is right "in there" with it.  What did Jesus say?  Why do we need man to interpret for us what the word of God says?  If we are in Christ and He in us, He shows and leads us into all truth.  There may be "some" truth in what is being said in favor of divorce - but I see it just the way it was in the days of Moses.  Men and women following the lusts of the flesh instead of the Spirit of the Living God.

If adultery is not a criterion for divorce, what is?

And if there is no such criteria, what is marriage?

[Sherman Nobles]

Is it better to curse the darkness or light a candle?  Standing against divorce is like cursing the darkness, it's pointless and benefits no one.  Whether they divorced for morally accpetable or frivolous reasons, railing on divorce's does no one any good.  If the traditional doctrine of MDR was any good, then it would seem that the divorce rate among Christians would be at least a little less than than the divorce rate among non-Christians, but that's not the case.  Why doesn't the traditional doctrine have a positive effect?  Because it is wrong, it's a web of deception, errant principles, and misinterpretations of scripture.  It puts the church in the position of trying to control people without any authority or power to do so (in regards to MDR). 

How do we promote healthy marriages? A good place to start is by recognizing that marriages are breakable, and not indissoluble. Instead of entering marriage unrealistically romatically claiming "unconditional love", let's admit that though we can attempt and make loving unconditionally our goal, continuing relationship is conditional.  We need to teach couples how to establish healthy personal boundaries. This implies that we draw a line in the sand and declare that if someone persistently crosses these boundaries, a wall of separation might need to be built for both our sakes.   

SammySmile spoke of the traditional doctrine being esoteric, and he is so right. The traditional doctrine is so heavenly minded, that it's no earthly good!  I agre that marriages should last for a life-time. That's what God wants for married couples "joined by God" but that does not mean that he holds us to that standard.  Rather, He gladly empowers us to reach for that star, even though we've crashed and burned before, even multiple times. 

Cursing the darkness does no one any good; let's focus on lighting candles with the truth of God's Word.

[4Christ]

I'm teaching what I am led to teach.  You teach yours Sherman.  I'm sure the attorneys and judges felt very much as you do regarding divorce.  Hence, the birth of "no fault" divorce.  The divorce rate skyrocketed after that invasion of man's will over God's regarding marriage. 

[zoonance]

Does our own experience drive our theology?

[Sherman Nobles]

I'm teaching what I am led to teach.  You teach yours Sherman.  I'm sure the attorneys and judges felt very much as you do regarding divorce.  Hence, the birth of "no fault" divorce.  The divorce rate skyrocketed after that invasion of man's will over God's regarding marriage. 

Of course, 4Christ, you're more than welcome to teach whatever you wish. I do my best to understand what the Word says and live by it, as I'm sure you do. I don't know how the attorneys and judges felt or what they think, or even what you what you meant by that.  Divorce is tragic at best, and most times its devestating to everyone even remotely related to the couple, especially the children.

Concerning "no fault" divorce, should the government control who can get divorced and who can not? And if so, what guidelines should they empose? Sadly when lawyers and the civil government have to become involved, everyone looses evern more, especially monetarily.  Should a couple have to air their dirty laundry in front of everyone, just because they chose to no longer live together?  Not only that, but divorce is devestating enough without requiring everyone to pay exhorbarant fees to lawyers and courts to mitigate the legal separation of a couple who are already separated.   

Did the divorce rate skyrocket because of "no-fault" divorce, or because of the increasing immorality in our culture?  Many people did not get a divorce, but rather just lived seperately with someone else because they could not or can not afford a legal divorce. 

All of this speculation and reasoning wearies me; I'd much rather simply study and apply the Word.  Jesus clearly affirmed marriages lasting a life-time, but He inspired Moses to legislate the bill of divorce to bring a proper legal end to otherwise broken relationships, and to mitigate the oppresion of women by allowing women who were expelled by their husbands to legally marry again and remain married. 

But I've went over that repeatedly and it seems that you've chosen to believe what you believe regardless of what evidence I present to the contrary so repetition of what I've shared before will likely do no good. And I certainly don't want to get into personal attacks.   If you would like to discuss a specific scripture or even a specific concept, I'll gladly do so, but I don't want to just argue.  So, may God continue to richly bless you and fill you with His peace!

Sincerely,
Sherman

[4Christ]

Does our own experience drive our theology?

No, but we are to witness of Jesus the Lord through our lives.  Our lives are our experiences.  But the focus is not us, it is Jesus.  What would Jesus have me to say about MDR?  It is that His grace is sufficient.  It is that without faith it is impossible to please Him.  It is that we are to love and walk in forgiveness towards those who mistreat us as He did for us on the cross at Calvary.  It is that He is God.  He hates divorce.  He holds us to our vows.  And the destructiveness of MDR needs to stop within His Church. 

[Sherman Nobles]

Does our own experience drive our theology?

I don't know that it drives our theology, but it certainly effects our theology and to a greater or lesser degree is a source of theology.  Thomas confessed that Jesus was his Lord and God, why, because he experienced the reality of the Risen Christ.  Experience often forces us to critically review what we believe and why we believe it? Critical review will often lead to repentance, a change of mind and a change of heart.  Sadly, it often does take an experience before we ever take the time or invest the energy required to do a serious study of the Word and be able to embrace the redeeming and liberating eternal and transcultural principles of Christ.

[Serenity432001]

It's been my experience that experience certainly can help open our minds a bit.  I know for me that I usually don't question or change my views unless my views have caused me lots of pain and anquish and then hopefully, with a prayerful mind and attitude, I, then, turn to God and say okay, open my mind to your will, my way is not working.   

[mikesayen]

this is a little about what the bible says in this issue.. check it out.

The proper word used in Rom 7:2 could be translated "bound of law