Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage

[Bonnie]

Bonnie
My point is that if you are going to take a legalistic literal view of all scripture it has to be consistant.  I am a former CoC preacher.  I can remember having to either have a woman bus driver or a man teaching the children on the bus.  This was because if a man was driving and a woman was teaching she was usurping his authority.  What you do on this board would clearly be teaching to men therefore under the literal view you would be usurping authority.  (Not my view but that of the conservative CoC)

I agree that God's wants one man and one woman together for life  (by the way I have been married to the same woman for 40 years)  However it is also God's will that we not sin and that we be obedient.  However, we know that we will sin and not be obedient in all things.  We have the grace of God and the blood of Christ that covers our short commings and sin.  The view that you and others posting here make divorce and remarriage unforgivale sin.

I disagree that discussing on this forum is usurping the authority of a man.

I don't say divorce and remarriage is unforgivable.  I say that Christians are taking a chance by doing it because it is wilful sin the same as murder, stealing, etc., are.  Too many are making it to easy to just cast off.

Congrats! on your long marriage.   

[Johnb]

Bonnie said
I disagree that discussing on this forum is usurping the authority of a man.

I agree I was giving the traditiona CoC view.  But then I now attend where we have women elders.


I don't say divorce and remarriage is unforgivable.  I say that Christians are taking a chance by doing it because it is wilful sin the same as murder, stealing, etc., are.  Too many are making it to easy to just cast off.

If a murder or a thief comes to Christ will they be forgivin?  If they were a Christian and ask God forgiveness would they be forgiven?  Sure they would so why is divorce and remarriage any different?

  Congrats! on your long marriage.


Thanks.   

[Bonnie]

Bonnie said
I disagree that discussing on this forum is usurping the authority of a man.

I agree I was giving the traditiona CoC view.  But then I now attend where we have women elders.


I don't say divorce and remarriage is unforgivable.  I say that Christians are taking a chance by doing it because it is wilful sin the same as murder, stealing, etc., are.  Too many are making it to easy to just cast off.

If a murder or a thief comes to Christ will they be forgivin?  If they were a Christian and ask God forgiveness would they be forgiven?  Sure they would so why is divorce and remarriage any different?

  Congrats! on your long marriage.


Thanks.  

To make it short ~ I'm not a believer of OSAS or any such doctrine that teaches we can sin all we want and it's okay.

[Johnb]

Bonnie said
To make it short ~ I'm not a believer of OSAS or any such doctrine that teaches we can sin all we want and it's okay.

Me either.  God wants us to do our best help others and live as good a life as we can.  But we will fall short in many areas and will always need God's grace.

[Bonnie]

Bonnie said
To make it short ~ I'm not a believer of OSAS or any such doctrine that teaches we can sin all we want and it's okay.

Me either.  God wants us to do our best help others and live as good a life as we can.  But we will fall short in many areas and will always need God's grace.

[HRoberson]

I've personally known God fearing Christian people who will actually admit that they actually believe that if someone cheats on a spouse and repents they can not marry but if someone murders a spouse and repents they can marry because their spouse is dead.  There are folks who believe this.  Is there anyone hear that believes that?

Which was my point.

We strain at gnats (the adulterer can't remarry -ever) but swallow camels because we do not grasp God.

[Serenity432001]

I've personally known God fearing Christian people who will actually admit that they actually believe that if someone cheats on a spouse and repents they can not marry but if someone murders a spouse and repents they can marry because their spouse is dead.  There are folks who believe this.  Is there anyone hear that believes that?

Which was my point.

We strain at gnats (the adulterer can't remarry -ever) but swallow camels because we do not grasp God.

[Reformer]

More On Marriage, Divorce, & Remarriage

     There's some question as to whether or not Jesus addressed sexual adultery in Matthew 19:9. You may be acquainted with Olan Hicks. He is expertly versed on this subject. He says in one of his  Newsletters:

    "Jesus, in citing a case of a man committing adultery [Matt. 19:9], specified two actions: 1) putting away a faithful wife and 2) marrying another. It is covenant breaking, yes, but it is done by leaving one and going to another—not by leaving only.

    "When Israel 'committed adultery' against God, they did two things: 1) broke their covenant with God and 2) joined themselves to idols. The man in Matthew 19:9 does the same two things: 1) breaks his covenant with his wife and 2) goes to another wife. Jesus said that is adultery."

    Yes, as brother Hicks indicates, adultery is committed even prior to marrying the second woman. "Adultery" is not always associated with sex. A believer is guilty of spiritual adultery when he breaks his covenant with God and places his allegiance in the things of this world. As Olan pointed out, the nation of Israel was guilty of adultery when she left God and joined herself to idols.

    I might add that the man who divorces his wife without justifiable cause and marries another woman cannot commit adultery with the woman he has just married. Sexual adultery is not committed with someone we're married to. And Jesus recognized that the two are married when He said,  "...and marries another woman" (Matt. 19:9).

      Remember the woman at the well? Jesus said she had had five husbands. Why didn't He say, "You've had six men in your life, but only one was your husband. You've been shacking up with the other five."  No! Rather, He recognized the truth that she had had five husbands, and she was only shacking up with her current male friend. The point is: God hates divorce, but He recognizes legal marriages.

    The man in Matthew 19:9 sinned by leaving his wife and joining himself to another. There's no issue at this point. The adultery occurred when he divorced his first wife—that is, he broke the marital covenant. It is not an unpardonable sin. Sexual adultery did not occur when he married his second wife and went to bed with her. The adultery had already been committed when he divorced his first wife.

    Then when does a married man and/or woman commit sexual adultery? When either one has sexual relations with another person while married to his/her spouse.

     But what about Romans 7:2?  "By law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage."    

    The man is no longer her husband if she has divorced him or he has divorced her. And if they are divorced, regardless of the cause, and each marries again, they are truly married to their second spouse. And if married (and Jesus recognized this fact in Matthew 19:9), they cannot commit adultery with their current spouses.

—Buff.

[Johnb]

Good post Buff.

[chosenone]

More On Marriage, Divorce, & Remarriage

     There's some question as to whether or not Jesus addressed sexual adultery in Matthew 19:9. You may be acquainted with Olan Hicks. He is expertly versed on this subject. He says in one of his  Newsletters:

    "Jesus, in citing a case of a man committing adultery [Matt. 19:9], specified two actions: 1) putting away a faithful wife and 2) marrying another. It is covenant breaking, yes, but it is done by leaving one and going to another—not by leaving only.

    "When Israel 'committed adultery' against God, they did two things: 1) broke their covenant with God and 2) joined themselves to idols. The man in Matthew 19:9 does the same two things: 1) breaks his covenant with his wife and 2) goes to another wife. Jesus said that is adultery."

    Yes, as brother Hicks indicates, adultery is committed even prior to marrying the second woman. "Adultery" is not always associated with sex. A believer is guilty of spiritual adultery when he breaks his covenant with God and places his allegiance in the things of this world. As Olan pointed out, the nation of Israel was guilty of adultery when she left God and joined herself to idols.

    I might add that the man who divorces his wife without justifiable cause and marries another woman cannot commit adultery with the woman he has just married. Sexual adultery is not committed with someone we're married to. And Jesus recognized that the two are married when He said,  "...and marries another woman" (Matt. 19:9).

      Remember the woman at the well? Jesus said she had had five husbands. Why didn't He say, "You've had six men in your life, but only one was your husband. You've been shacking up with the other five."  No! Rather, He recognized the truth that she had had five husbands, and she was only shacking up with her current male friend. The point is: God hates divorce, but He recognizes legal marriages.

    The man in Matthew 19:9 sinned by leaving his wife and joining himself to another. There's no issue at this point. The adultery occurred when he divorced his first wife—that is, he broke the marital covenant. It is not an unpardonable sin. Sexual adultery did not occur when he married his second wife and went to bed with her. The adultery had already been committed when he divorced his first wife.

    Then when does a married man and/or woman commit sexual adultery? When either one has sexual relations with another person while married to his/her spouse.

     But what about Romans 7:2?  "By law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage."    

    The man is no longer her husband if she has divorced him or he has divorced her. And if they are divorced, regardless of the cause, and each marries again, they are truly married to their second spouse. And if married (and Jesus recognized this fact in Matthew 19:9), they cannot commit adultery with their current spouses.

—Buff.

The word used in the Bible passage about divorce as in 'except for adultery' is in fact 'pornea' so the theory above about adultery not being sexual (or not just being sexual) is surely wrong. Pornea means sexual immorality such as adultery, fornication, homosexual sex, and other such sexual sins.

yes, Jesus does recognise the lady at the well's marriages,(and I love that story) but that doesnt mean that she should have married that many times (of course we dont know the reasons for the marriages not lasting)or that God approved of what she had done.

Of course we can , in civil law, get married and and divorced as many times as we like for whatever reason, but surely that doesnt mean that this is right with God? We are supposed to be trying to obey what He says about this and other things in our lives.

Adultery. or 'pornea' can be fogiven of course as can divorcing someone for selfish reasons, but these things have consequenses, and isnt it possible that one of them MAY be that we arent able to marry again?   
If we murder someone we can be forgiven, but it doesnt bring that dead person back to life and it doeant mean that we wont have to spend most of our lives in prison paying for dong it. So why do we see adultery so lightly. It may not be murder, but it still extreemly serious in Gods sight, and it the ultimate betrayal for the spouse.
There are consequenses for everything we do.

Do people think that if someone thought that by cheating on their spouse and divorcing they would have to remain unmarried that less would do it? Do you also think that if someone was considering divorcing their spouse for selfish reasons, they would think twice of they knew that they couldnt remarry? I do.

We also have to remember that before Jesus came the punishment for those who committed adultery was generally to be stoned to death. That is how serious God saw that betrayal. We seem to have played down the absolute seriousness of it, maybe as it is so common now and doesnt shock anymore. Could this be why The Bible indicates that this is the only reason for a divorce?
If God saw it as something that should be punished by death, then its maybe not surprising that the consequenses of doing it may be that we will never be able to remarry.

[Sherman Nobles]

As I've pointed out in previous posts on Mt.19, the passage is often torn from its cultural, historical, and literary context and interpreted to mean something Jesus never intended.  Mos people misunderstand this scripture because they do not understand:

1. The trap in vs. 3 was about the "any-matter" debate over civil law - "No-fault" divorce procedures and philosophies.  The original question/trap did not have anything to do with acceptable reasons for divorce, though that is how it is commonly mistranslated.  Rather, it would be better translated (thought for thought) as "Some Pharisees came to Him to test Him saying, "Is No-fault divorce the right way to go (or should we stick with traditional divorce showing cause?"

Jesus illudes the trap and replies affirming the divine ideal for marriage, refusing to get sucked into a debate about civil law, and in essense saying that they should be more concerned about helping people's marriages last instead of arguing over divorce procedures.

2. Jesus repeatedly fully endorsed the Law, saying that not the least letter or vowel mark would disappear until heaven and earth come to an end.  Thus Jesus fully endorsed the Mosaic bill of divorce too. 

3. People often fail to not the in Mt. 19, the Pharisees ask Jesus another question, "Why then did Moses give the bill of divorce?"  To which Jesus replies with 2 reasons why Moses was inspired by God to legislate the bill of divorce.

Reason 1 - the transcultural reason - the hardness of heart.  Sometimes, though it is not what God intends or desires for his loved ones, one or both of a couple harden their hearts against their spouse.  Thus in order to prevent greater hardening, and to hold eachother accountable for their actions, divorce is a necessary evil kind like amputation.  If your leg is full of gangrene, amputation can save your life; but you certainly don't want to go around hacking legs off.

Reason 2 - to stop the ancient near-eastern cultural practice of men expelling their wives and thus causing them to commit adultery and the men that marry such expelled wives from committing adultery.  It stopped this common practice by providing a proper legal end to an otherwise broken marriage, freeing the woman to marry another man legally and not fear being reclaimed by her "ex"-husband. 

4.  The "except for fornication" clause is not about acceptable reasons for divorce, the whole passage is not about that; rather, it is a reference to illegal relationships that don't need a bill of divorce because they are not legal to begin with.  And it likely alludes to the adulterous relationship between Herod and Herodias (Herod's brother, Phillip's wife).  The same relationship that John the Baptist lost his head over.

So it was a trap to get Jesus to loose his head over too.  The traditional doctrine that Jesus wished to repudiate the bill of divorce, make marriage indissoluble, and thus remarriage an impossibility is completely unscriptural.  Jesus affirmed the divine ideal for marriage as a life-long loving monogomous covenant relationship between a man and a woman; but He did not in any way indicate that marriage was indissoluble or a divorce' could not remarry!

For a longer review of Mt. 19 look at post #19 on this thread.
http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/index.php/topic,20182.15.html

P.S.  The Mark 10 passage is very different with a very different message as noted too in a previous post on this thread!  Mark wrote to a Greco-Roman audience who had no such thing as a bill of divorce and a free woman could initiate a divorce as easily as a free man simply by leaving.  Of course, the rules for slaves was different.  The key point of Marks passage is that if either a man or a woman leaves their spouse so that, or in order to, marry someone else, they are committing adultery.  Jesus spoke concerning the attitude of one's heart, condemning selfish motives for divorce. But here too He does not forbid remarriage.  Remarriage was just not an issue.

[mikesayen]

"Law of the husband