|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 3:37:10 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
There is a false teaching prevalent today that spreads the lie that you cannot marry again after divorce. Yet it is just a legalist lie born of modern Pharisees and many have been swept into it. May God have mercy on them.
I Cor. 7:10-11, Mt. 5:32, Mt. 19:9, Lk. 16:16-18, Mk. 10:12
1 Cor 7:10-11 and Luke 16:18 do not address adultery at all yet Jesus specifically calls it out in Matthew 5:32 and again in Matthew 19:9. The Mark 10 account is a repeat of Matthew 19 account. For whatever reasons the exception was not recorded in Mark but clearly exists in Matthew. We cannot excuse away these verses in Mat 5 and Mat 19 merely by wishing them away. It is clear that the other verses that do not mention adultery are the general case and the Matthew verses give specifics. Yet they still are the word of God.
So then to drop these verses from Matthew in the Word of God is false teaching and a lie.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
How does God recognize a marriage? Because God recognizes the marriage vows of anyone, even the pagans.
I agree, that's why 1st marriages contracted BEFORE salvation are just as binding to the Lord as those 1st marriages contracted AFTER conversion.
Yes just as binding. And just as dissolvable. When the marriage covenant is abandoned by even one spouse, it is broken and dissolved. Which is exactly why the scriptures clearly point out that for the estranged spouses to re-unite, they would have to marry again, but this is prohibited in OT scripture if one spouse has been defiled (i.e. married to another and I would posit, had sexual relations with another is sufficient for the defilement).
So then since scripture requires estranged spouses to marry again to be considered married, it therefore requires that the original covenant is destroyed and no longer binding.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
How does adultery turn into a lawful marriage? Marriage is already lawful, but repentance is needed to restore your relationship to God IF you are in adultery of any kind.
Jesus called a marriage after a divorce, adultery. Adultery is NOT lawful. Adultery means you are having unlawful relations with another person's spouse. You cannot be "lawfully" married and committing adultery at the same time.
Jesus called marriage after divorce adultery in the context of marrying an adulterous person who was just divorced. He did not address the innocent spouse nor did he address a repentant sinner who is clean. Once the sinner has repented of the sin, they are no longer committing adultery. Period. End of story. You cannot shackle God's forgiveness to man's ignorance.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
How do you get out of that adultery? It depends on the adultery, but in all you repent of your sins to God and restore your relationship to God.
How does one get out of adultery? They forsake the adulterous relationship. There is no other way and there is no NT scripture that teaches adultery "changes" into a lawful marriage, joined as "one flesh" by God. The true fruit of repentance of any sin is the forsaking of that sin............not confession and staying in a relationship Jesus calls adultery.
No, they repent of their adultery. And then they continue to be a godly husband or godly wife to their spouse the remainder of their days. There is no other way and there is no NT scripture that teaches that adultery requires a special forgiveness or that understanding this principle requires special revelation. That is why only a very small, yet vocal, minority of believers adhere to this legalist position on the requirements of men and not the requirements of God for mercy and forgiveness.
The second marriage is not any sin that is a problem. It is the heart condition that led the person to be an adulterer and leave a marriage. That sin, once confessed and repented from, cleanses the sinner and makes them whole. Then they are to continue in their restoration to God by being a godly spouse and not repeating the mistakes from the past and forsaking another vow. Otherwise, you are in a seriously twisted and vicious circle. But then again, when men came up with this false teaching, they did not think about the logical implications. Only what was in their little world view.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
If you divorced previously and are now married again, you remain married. THAT is what is required of the consequences. You stay and stick it out. You do the right thing and be faithful to your spouse, be a godly spouse, and never attempt to go back to the former spouse. Because if you do go back to them then that action IS adultery.
How would forsaking adultery and being reconciled with one's lawful spouse, be adultery? It is forsaking sin to return to, if possible, the "one flesh" God joined-----the "one flesh" Paul teaches will not be separated until death (Rom. 7:2-3, I Cor. 7:39). Unless you can show scripturally that a second marriage after a divorce IS BLESSED by God and no longer adultery, your counsel is not of value.
Being married is not adultery. Not even a second or third or later marriage. Adultery is the sexual immorality that led someone to the state of being divorced. And it is not true that both spouses are adulterers. It could be, but it is quite common for their to be just one. Unless you can show scripturally where God is unable to forgive and forget these sins, then your counsel is of NO value.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
And you don't always get the chance to restore what was lost in sin.
This is very true and this is why many should think long and hard, first before they divorce and secondly before they enter into a second marriage that Jesus calls adultery..............tinasdad's situation is a heartbreaking example.
Yes, everyone should think long and hard before they divorce. But sometimes all the thinking in the world does not stop the sinful spouse from divorcing anyway. Yet the Christian Pharisee would then require the innocent spouse that did not want divorce and did not sin to be bound to a broken and dissolved covenant and subsequently be the ones to serve out their sentence. Their damnation of divorce falls on the deaf ears of the spouse that left with a hardened heart. It only rings of contempt, judgment, and condemnation for the innocent spouse who remained faithful to the end. Unless you can show in any scripture where God requires the innocent to pay for the sins of the guilty, except for the entire redemptive story of Christ, then your counsel is not just of no value, but is false teaching and will cause others to stumble.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
How does a murderer repent and restore their relationship to God? They seek forgiveness, but they cannot restore life to what is dead. And neither can a man divorce his current wife and return to a dead vow
And so it goes with those who commit adultery............sometimes they cannot get back what they lost.........That is the horrible effects of sin. However, just as God does not give a murderer carte blanche to continue his/her murders and be AOK with Him, He also does not allow His followers to remain in sexual sin without it affecting His relationship with us. If a person DOES depart, and desires to follow the Lord, Paul teaches they are to remain unmarried----even if reconciliation is not possible.
You cannot continue a muder. Once committed it is done. Any additional murders are additional sins. This is an incorrect comparison on your part and a logical fallacy. God does not allow His followers to remain in sexual sin. And therefore once they repent of their sexual sins, they are clean. Departing will do nothing other than make a few people feel like the EARNED their way to repentance for what they have done. However, works are not going to save you. And in fact, leaving a second spouse to return to the first is the next murder of the adulterer. Again this is the twisted cycle of sin created by this false teaching of second marriages being adultery.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
PS. Using children as a reason to continue living in adultery is just not biblical.........in the OT nor NT, so I'm not quite sure why that particular point keeps coming up in people's reasons for staying in a second marriage. If the "children" are such a concern, what about the children of 1st marriages? Why isn't it important to SHOW them what unconditional love is toward a spouse? Isn't that Christ's desire-----that we show our children who HE is through the choices we make? While ANY of us still have breath in us, will He forsake us due to sin?
Causing children to stumble is a biblically condemned action. Using the sanctity of marriage as the covenant protection over children is scriptural. Second marriages are NOT adultery. Therefore the correct assertion is the children are a reason to continue to be a godly parent and remain in the family and keep it whole.
The children of the first marriage are a concern. However, the parents must still provide for them. There are laws to enforce this. And they are shown unconditional love by supporting them and loving them in spite of the fact that they are possibly distanced from them. You can show unconditional love by doing the hard things that are right. You do not show a child love by teaching them that two wrongs make a right. You only confuse them and worse, you can cause them to stumble.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
Also, concerning Deut. 24:1-4, yes, the truth is that Jesus THREW this allowance out. The thing too that always gets ignored is that the woman was ALLOWED to remarry----without sin. In other words, she was NOT an adulteress. Her second marriage WAS lawful. However, Jesus' teachings on divorce and remarriage is VERY different. In the NT, a remarriage after a divorce is called ADULTERY. Paul in Rom. 7:2-3 taught that if a woman marries another while her husband lives, she shall be called an adulteress. Yet, if her husband dies and then she marries another, she will not be an adulteress. It's very clear that these passages in the OT and NT are VERY different. In Him, Cindy
I find it interesting that you claim that Jesus was teaching anything radically different from the OT. In fact, everything Jesus taught was to clarify the meaning and the application of the principles that were contained in the OT Law. In other words, He came to fulfill the Law, not throw it out. Again this is more false teaching and in reality heretical to say that Jesus made a special case for divorce and second marriages when there is no other example of this in Scripture.
I believe that Galatians 1:6-10 apply to anyone that is trying to pervert the ministry and Gospel of Christ. Something about "let them be accursed".
And again in Galatians 3:15-29 we see the intent of the Law. It leads us to Christ. And in Romans 3:31, the question is asked "do we then nullify the Law through faith?" And the answer is clear, no we do not. On the contrary we establish the Law.
So then, how do you now see your views on the OT vs the NT teaching on marriage? Did God change between the OT and the NT? Did Christ invalidate the Father?
But more importantly, we are never in scripture given the command to withhold mercy. How much more so does our Father show us mercy? Infintely more.
James 2:13
For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.
_____________________________
Click here for an example of God blessing a man with a second chance at marriage in a new wife.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 4:51:53 PM
|
|
|
momfree
Posts: 146
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
"You cannot continue a muder. Once committed it is done. Any additional murders are additional sins. This is an incorrect comparison on your part and a logical fallacy. God does not allow His followers to remain in sexual sin. And therefore once they repent of their sexual sins, they are clean. Departing will do nothing other than make a few people feel like the EARNED their way to repentance for what they have done. However, works are not going to save you. And in fact, leaving a second spouse to return to the first is the next murder of the adulterer. Again this is the twisted cycle of sin created by this false teaching of second marriages being adultery"
I really liked that part of your post-well the whole thing was right on...but this especially.
I dare these people who are quoting these false doctrines to find ONE scripture that states repentance of an adulterous marriage requires you divorce them and leave that marriage. If obviously everything else in there is pretty clear cut/to the point/quite described-why would He leave this out if he intended for us to repent by divorcing again?
Grasping at straws and man made illogical interpretations when there is NOTHING to back this notion up in scripture-
repent means confessing your sins before God...it means you don't go and kill again, it means you don't go and be an adulteress again by hooking up w/your ex-wife if you are married causing yourself and your previous spouse to be adulterous, it means you confess, you live a holy life before him and become a good husband/wife/parent....i have no idea how you can jump to the conclusion that repentance means divorcing again.....there is NO biblical basis for this.
Edited to add: Is is the position of the church and most Christians, theologians, pastors, deacons, etc that SOMETIMES it's the act of actually marrying the other person that MAY or MAY NOT make them an adulterer...it has NEVER been held that the 2nd marriage is a continued state of sin or that for repentance to be true you must sin again, or that our works somehow will save us. I've never heard of the "continued state of sin while you remain married" position until recently. Call me naive, but is this a recent phenomenon? Who started teaching this, when and is it tied to a certain denomination/religion/group?
I'm truly asking a sincere question because i've never heard such a thing. Can someone answer when this started, by whom? THanks!
_____________________________
"Peace is the absence of anger"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 5:17:59 PM
|
|
|
Expos4ever
Posts: 24
Joined: 11/23/2005
Status: offline
|
When someone remarries "unbiblically" (and I realize there is a diversity of opinion re when remarriage is OK biblically), they are sometimes accused of being selfish, seeking their own interests ahead of obedience, or of "doing what they want".
That Christians will do "what they want to do anyway" may well be true. In fact, I think it is so true and so pervasive in areas other than divorce that it exposes a real inconsistency in the church. In short, the same Christians who criticize people who get remarried because that's what they "want to do", are, I would suggest, often the same ones who also do, in other areas of life, exactly that which they want to do, in clear disobedience to the instructions of Jesus. I am not excluding myself from this criticism. In short, we who spend money on ourselves (vacations, nice cars, jewelry, etc.) while others die for want of food and basic medical care, are pursuing our own desires over the call of the Kingdom.
The club of Christians who do "what they want to do" is a big one and it does not only contain those who re-marry.
I realize this post may be deemed off-topic, but I would ask the mods to consider that issues of consistency in obedience across different aspects of the Christian experience are indeed relevant to the topic at hand. There is a general principle at issue - putting the needs of the Kingdom ahead our own. Only those who "walk the walk" of self-denial in all areas (or are at least trying to do so) have the moral high ground to suggest that remarriers are pursuing their own selfish interests ahead of obedience.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 5:33:41 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1547
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
1 Cor 7:10-11 and Luke 16:18 do not address adultery at all yet Jesus specifically calls it out in Matthew 5:32 and again in Matthew 19:9.
But Paul DID address adultery in Rom. 7:2-3. It doesn't dissolve the 1st marriage bond in the case of "extra marital" adultery or in the case of adultery committed by a remarriage.
quote:
The Mark 10 account is a repeat of Matthew 19 account. For whatever reasons the exception was not recorded in Mark but clearly exists in Matthew. We cannot excuse away these verses in Mat 5 and Mat 19 merely by wishing them away. It is clear that the other verses that do not mention adultery are the general case and the Matthew verses give specifics.
Yes, in Mk 10 Jesus speaks to His disciples IN PRIVATE........no mention of the ability to marry another after a divorce. I agree that Mt. gives an "allowance", but how you interpret that allowance doesn't "expand" the other teachings, your interpretation contradicts the clearer passages. Those clearer passages show a marriage BINDING even in the face of adultery (Rom. 7:2-3 AND EVEN Mt. 19:9, which shows the INNOCENTLY one put away UNABLE to marry again without committing adultery. Can you explain this?)
quote:
Yes just as binding. And just as dissolvable. When the marriage covenant is abandoned by even one spouse, it is broken and dissolved.
Again, your viewpoint is disproven by Scripture. As is shown even in the Mt. 19:9 passage, the INNOCENTLY put away spouse is NOT FREE............the "bond" is NOT dissolved---even though the other has married again. If the bond were dissolved, then the "left" one would be free to marry another. We see the same teaching in Rom. 7:2-3............even if a woman DOES marry another (making her an adulteress), she will not be free from the bond of marriage until her 1st husband dies.................THEN, and only then, will she be 'free' to marry another. Paul never, in ANY of his writings/teachings, says that divorce or adultery DISSOLVES the "one flesh" that endures until death----quite the opposite.
quote:
the scriptures clearly point out that for the estranged spouses to re-unite, they would have to marry again, but this is prohibited in OT scripture if one spouse has been defiled (i.e. married to another and I would posit, had sexual relations with another is sufficient for the defilement).
I think we have a good picture of what God expects in the Book of Hosea. Gomer "left" the marriage and went after other men. Was their "bond" dissolved in God's sight? No, it was not. Hosea went after his wife and brought her home. She was surely "unclean/defiled"..............yet their marriage was restored.
If the "vow" of a second marriage is what you are thinking is the binding factor here, it appears that Jesus doesn't even recognize the vow as binding. Otherwise He would never have called a second marriage a sin (adultery). The bond of the first marriage is what makes the second union, adultery.
quote:
Jesus called marriage after divorce adultery in the context of marrying an adulterous person who was just divorced. He did not address the innocent spouse nor did he address a repentant sinner who is clean. Once the sinner has repented of the sin, they are no longer committing adultery. Period. End of story. You cannot shackle God's forgiveness to man's ignorance.
Wait a minute Neuron. You are, on one hand, saying that adultery DISSOLVES the covenant of marriage. You give the example of an adulterous person who is put away committing adultery by entering into another marriage? Wasn't that adulterous person's 1st marriage dissolved through what you believe is a lawful divorce? If so, they would be free to marry again according to your thinking, right?
quote:
No, they repent of their adultery. And then they continue to be a godly husband or godly wife to their spouse the remainder of their days. There is no other way and there is no NT scripture that teaches that adultery requires a special forgiveness or that understanding this principle requires special revelation.
Do you apply this same reasoning to other illicit relationships Neuron?
quote:
Being married is not adultery. Not even a second or third or later marriage. Adultery is the sexual immorality that led someone to the state of being divorced. And it is not true that both spouses are adulterers. It could be, but it is quite common for their to be just one. Unless you can show scripturally where God is unable to forgive and forget these sins, then your counsel is of NO value.
Neuron, God is able AND willing to forgive ALL our sins as we confess and forsake them. You believe that being married after a divorce is not the adultery..........you will have a very difficult time proving that stance from God's Word. Jesus says "whosoever MARRIES a divorced woman commits adultery"...........you see, the adultery occurs with the NEW MARRIAGE. The "other" person/third person who enters the picture AFTER a divorce will be charged with adultery, if he marries a divorced woman. Jesus said it.
quote:
the Christian Pharisee would then require the innocent spouse that did not want divorce and did not sin to be bound to a broken and dissolved covenant and subsequently be the ones to serve out their sentence.
Again, Jesus prohibited marriage for a divorced person (Mt. 19:9, Lk. 16:18, Mk. 10:12, Mt. 5:32). Paul taught the same thing((I Cor. 7:10-11).
quote:
You cannot continue a muder. Once committed it is done. Any additional murders are additional sins. This is an incorrect comparison on your part and a logical fallacy. God does not allow His followers to remain in sexual sin. And therefore once they repent of their sexual sins, they are clean.
You are right.......once you repent, any additional "doing" are additional sins. If one is committing adultery------meaning they are having UNLAWFUL relations with someone who is NOT their spouse.............how do they repent? Do they stay and continue the relationship with the person who is NOT THEIR SPOUSE? or do you believe that confession turns the person who was not a lawful spouse into a lawful spouse? Exactly at what point in a new marriage does it then become lawful-------the new vow dissolves the previous? The first sexual act after the vow? The realization that the new relationship is adultery and confessing that knowledge? I sincerely ask this: at what point is adultery no longer adultery?
quote:
Causing children to stumble is a biblically condemned action. Using the sanctity of marriage as the covenant protection over children is scriptural. Second marriages are NOT adultery. Therefore the correct assertion is the children are a reason to continue to be a godly parent and remain in the family and keep it whole.
Yes, you are quite right Neuron. It is a serious thing to cause a child to sin (stumble), yet this is exactly what the majority of the church is doing today. The thing I see is that we are not conforming to His likeness, we are bringing Him down to our human likeness. Doing such WILL cause our children to stumble/sin and forsake the way of the Lord. These days are very much like what the Lord spoke in His Word: "Every man/woman is doing what is right IN THEIR OWN SIGHT"-----that is evidenced by the lack of scriptural support by many. "I think", "I feel", "It's not logical", "it's not fair", "I know what the bible says, but that can't be what it means"..........these are the mindsets of many in the "church" today.
I feel very sad for the legacy we are passing down to our children. Many of our children will not understand the Godly concept of "perseverence".........nor of dying to self for the good of others...........Many are saying "God wants me to have a Godly family and to raise my children in such"...........yet God HAS given that person a spouse and children, but the spouse is not desireable.........they are off into sin..........they are to be rejected and a "better" spouse sought in his/her place. I don't see Jesus in any of that. That type of mindset is completely opposed to what I know of the Lord and His mercy towards those in sin. The mindset that we shouldn't/don't have to suffer because of other's sins is something I can't find in scripture and a terrible thing to pass down to our children who will not be equipped to live the Christian life (it is no longer "I" that lives, but Christ who lives within me).
quote:
I find it interesting that you claim that Jesus was teaching anything radically different from the OT. In fact, everything Jesus taught was to clarify the meaning and the application of the principles that were contained in the OT Law. In other words, He came to fulfill the Law, not throw it out.
I never said Jesus came to "throw out the law". Scripture teaches the "law" is good. Notice what He says immediately before He speaks of divorce/marriage as adultery in Lk. 16:16-18............Don't you find it interesting that the divorce/remarriage prohibition is placed just in that spot? I think it's significant.
You never addressed Deut. 24. Those who say it is applicable to us today-----the church and the teachings of the NT, need to compare apples to apples. This passage does not apply to us, nor does it line up with what Jesus taught on divorce/remarriage. Jesus DID clarify and and at the same time brought back what had been perverted by man. Even the disciples were astounded at His Words-------and they knew the "law"---so something WAS different and some things did change. When Jesus came to the earth----no longer is it an "eye for an eye", but now it is "bless those who curse you", give more to those who take from you, "forgive and give the opportunity to repent----don't stone to death"....................many things did indeed "change"...........but the changes were to bring us in line with God's very heart and mind. Do you think the divorce/remarriage rate is reflective of people having the heart and mind of Christ..........
< Message edited by lastblast -- 11/29/2005 5:39:42 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 5:41:22 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1547
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: momfree
I dare these people who are quoting these false doctrines to find ONE scripture that states repentance of an adulterous marriage requires you divorce them and leave that marriage. If obviously everything else in there is pretty clear cut/to the point/quite described-why would He leave this out if he intended for us to repent by divorcing again?
Do we have to have exact scripture before we can say that a homosexual who is repentant should forsake his/her relationship as the fruit of repentance? How about a couple living together in fornication? How about a person who is a known liar? Did not Jesus already label the sin(s)? Is that not good enough for us? Do we have a misunderstanding as to what true repentance entails? In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 8:19:19 PM
|
|
|
Restored_Heart
Posts: 839
Joined: 7/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Northstar
I do not believe once saved always saved, otherwise I would not have such a big problem with remarriage. If once saved always saved is true, then a person can make a profession of faith and then pretty much live how they want, but I believe that we have to keep pressing on. I believe the Bible where it says that if we say we know God and don't do as He commands (and this is in every area of my life, not just marriage, divorce and remarriage), then we are liars and the truth is not in us.
If you believe that Salvation can be "lost", how do you explain these scriptures?
John 10:27-30
27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and the Father are one."
Romans 8: 31-39
31 What can we say about such wonderful things as these? If God is for us, who can ever be against us? 32 Since God did not spare even his own Son but gave him up for us all, won't God, who gave us Christ, also give us everything else? 33 Who dares accuse us whom God has chosen for his own? Will God? No! He is the one who has given us right standing with himself. 34 Who then will condemn us? Will Christ Jesus? No, for he is the one who died for us and was raised to life for us and is sitting at the place of highest honor next to God, pleading for us. 35 Can anything ever separate us from Christ's love? Does it mean he no longer loves us if we have trouble or calamity, or are persecuted, or are hungry or cold or in danger or threatened with death? 36 (Even the Scriptures say, "For your sake we are killed every day; we are being slaughtered like sheep." ) 37 No, despite all these things, overwhelming victory is ours through Christ, who loved us. 38 And I am convinced that nothing can ever separate us from his love. Death can't, and life can't. The angels can't, and the demons can't. Our fears for today, our worries about tomorrow, and even the powers of hell can't keep God's love away. 39 Whether we are high above the sky or in the deepest ocean, nothing in all creation will ever be able to separate us from the love of God that is revealed in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 9:30-33
30 Well then, what shall we say about these things? Just this: The Gentiles have been made right with God by faith, even though they were not seeking him. 31 But the Jews, who tried so hard to get right with God by keeping the law, never succeeded. 32 Why not? Because they were trying to get right with God by keeping the law and being good instead of by depending on faith. They stumbled over the great rock in their path. 33 God warned them of this in the Scriptures when he said, "I am placing a stone in Jerusalem that causes people to stumble, and a rock that makes them fall. But anyone who believes in him will not be disappointed. "
Romans 10:1-11
1 Dear brothers and sisters, the longing of my heart and my prayer to God is that the Jewish people might be saved. 2 I know what enthusiasm they have for God, but it is misdirected zeal. 3 For they don't understand God's way of making people right with himself. Instead, they are clinging to their own way of getting right with God by trying to keep the law. They won't go along with God's way. 4 For Christ has accomplished the whole purpose of the law. All who believe in him are made right with God. 5 For Moses wrote that the law's way of making a person right with God requires obedience to all of its commands. 6 But the way of getting right with God through faith says, "You don't need to go to heaven" (to find Christ and bring him down to help you). 7 And it says, "You don't need to go to the place of the dead" (to bring Christ back to life again). 8 Salvation that comes from trusting Christ – which is the message we preach – is already within easy reach. In fact, the Scriptures say, "The message is close at hand; it is on your lips and in your heart." 9 For if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by confessing with your mouth that you are saved. 11 As the Scriptures tell us, "Anyone who believes in him will not be disappointed. "
Romans 14:10-13
10 So why do you condemn another Christian? Why do you look down on another Christian? Remember, each of us will stand personally before the judgment seat of God. 11 For the Scriptures say, "'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow to me and every tongue will confess allegiance to God.'" 12 Yes, each of us will have to give a personal account to God. 13 So don't condemn each other anymore. Decide instead to live in such a way that you will not put an obstacle in another Christian's path.
Galations 6:12-17
12 Those who are trying to force you to be circumcised are doing it for just one reason. They don't want to be persecuted for teaching that the cross of Christ alone can save. 13 And even those who advocate circumcision don't really keep the whole law. They only want you to be circumcised so they can brag about it and claim you as their disciples. 14 As for me, God forbid that I should boast about anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because of that cross, my interest in this world died long ago, and the world's interest in me is also long dead. 15 It doesn't make any difference now whether we have been circumcised or not. What counts is whether we really have been changed into new and different people. 16 May God's mercy and peace be upon all those who live by this principle. They are the new people of God. 17 From now on, don't let anyone trouble me with these things. For I bear on my body the scars that show I belong to Jesus.
Phillipians 3:1-10
1 Whatever happens, dear brothers and sisters, may the Lord give you joy. I never get tired of telling you this. I am doing this for your own good. 2 Watch out for those dogs, those wicked men and their evil deeds, those mutilators who say you must be circumcised to be saved. 3 For we who worship God in the Spirit are the only ones who are truly circumcised. We put no confidence in human effort. Instead, we boast about what Christ Jesus has done for us.
4 Yet I could have confidence in myself if anyone could. If others have reason for confidence in their own efforts, I have even more! 5 For I was circumcised when I was eight days old, having been born into a pure-blooded Jewish family that is a branch of the tribe of Benjamin. So I am a real Jew if there ever was one! What's more, I was a member of the Pharisees, who demand the strictest obedience to the Jewish law. 6 And zealous? Yes, in fact, I harshly persecuted the church. And I obeyed the Jewish law so carefully that I was never accused of any fault. 7 I once thought all these things were so very important, but now I consider them worthless because of what Christ has done. 8 Yes, everything else is worthless when compared with the priceless gain of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. I have discarded everything else, counting it all as garbage, so that I may have Christ
9 and become one with him. I no longer count on my own goodness or my ability to obey God's law, but I trust Christ to save me. For God's way of making us right with himself depends on faith. 10 As a result, I can really know Christ and experience the mighty power that raised him from the dead. I can learn what it means to suffer with him, sharing in his death,
Ephesians 2:
1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-- 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body[a] and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved-- 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
One in Christ
11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands-- 12remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.
Instead of depending upon my feeble actions to save myself, I prefer to trust Christ to save me and cleanse me. Then allow Him to change my heart and my life as I walk with Him.
The truth remains, I will be held accountable for my actions as you will be held accountable for your own. You do not know how God is working in my life, and I do not pretend to know how God is working in yours. I know that I seek God daily, He speaks in my life and He has called me to remarriage and is orchestrating it even now. I was the innocent spouse in my divorce, during which God has been with me everyday and has guided my every step. He does so even now and I trust Him for both my salvation and my life-path.
_____________________________
<------- Lil Peanut.... due ~11/3
Yes, this will make 6...
Formerly Hunterjumper777
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 8:43:27 PM
|
|
|
hisway...
Posts: 17
Joined: 8/28/2005
From: TN
Status: offline
|
Good post, Hunter. I can't see how anyone could debate a gift that God has given us all, if we'll just accept and believe.
I don't know too many people that would give a gift and then take it back.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 8:57:20 PM
|
|
|
Restored_Heart
Posts: 839
Joined: 7/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
lastblast
Do we have to have exact scripture before we can say that a homosexual who is repentant should forsake his/her relationship as the fruit of repentance? How about a couple living together in fornication?
I find it interesting to group homosexuality with sex outside the marriage covenant. In the OT, sexual sin is grouped separately from homosexuality. Homosexuality is grouped with sacrificing children to Molech and beastiality (the detestables), while sexual sin of all flavors is dealt with in one continuous section. (Leviticus 18)
I do not say that homosexuality is a more heinous sin than lying or adultery, sin is sin, but it is a different form of sin than normal sexual sin.
Homosexual marriage is wrong for reasons other than being outside the marriage covenant. God's plan for marriage is for one man - one woman, for life - barring the aforementioned exceptions of abandonment by an unbeliever, or adultery. These were mentioned in scripture by Jesus and Paul, and we do disagree over interpretation, but they WERE said and they DO exist. You cannot explain them away.
Marriage after divorce is NOT the same as a homosexual relationship, nor is remarriage necessarily adultery. The act of sex that destroyed the first marriage covenant is the sin.
-- edited to correct wording
_____________________________
<------- Lil Peanut.... due ~11/3
Yes, this will make 6...
Formerly Hunterjumper777
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 9:17:46 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1547
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hunterjumper777
I find it interesting to group homosexuality with sex outside the marriage covenant. In the OT, sexual sin is grouped separately from homosexuality. Homosexuality is grouped with sacrificing children to Molech and beastiality (the detestables), while sexual sin of all flavors is dealt with in one continuous section. (Leviticus 18)
I do not say that homosexuality is a more heinous sin than lying or adultery, sin is sin, but it is a different form of sin than normal sexual sin.
Hello Hunter, Yes, I agree that homosexuality is sin as is adultery----in the OT we find both sins were punishable by death. Serious stuff to God. The good thing is the penalty is no longer death, instead God granted the ability to repent (forsake the sin) by His grace.
quote:
Homosexual marriage is wrong for reasons other than being outside the marriage covenant. God's plan for marriage is for one man - one woman, for life - barring the aforementioned exceptions of abandonment by an unbeliever, or adultery. These were mentioned in scripture by Jesus and Paul, and we do disagree over interpretation, but they WERE said and they DO exist. You cannot explain them away.
Homosexual marriage is just as much outside the will of God as is adultery. For me, it's hard to understand how many in today's church believe that what Jesus called adultery (having unlawful relations with another's spouse) is entering into a covenant marriage. How is that any different than a homosexual getting married, believing they are blessed in God's eyes? Neither homosexual marriage nor adultery constitute a marriage covenant. A piece of paper does not make it so. Just because WE say we're joined in marriage and it's lawful in God's sight, does not mean it's true. In fact, unless we can find it in God's Word that His approval is upon such a relationship, I think we ought to stick with His last words on the topic.
Concerning our differing opinions on the "adultery" clause and desertion issue, I am interested in your take of Mt. 19:9's "innocent" woman since you believe adultery frees one to marry another.
quote:
Marriage after divorce is NOT the same as a homosexual relationship, nor is remarriage necessarily adultery. The act of sex that destroyed the first marriage covenant is the sin.
Can you share with me what scriptures lead you to believe that a sex act destroys/dissolves the one flesh? Blessings as you seek Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 9:53:28 PM
|
|
|
cadz
Posts: 148
Joined: 9/18/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: momfree
I've never heard of the "continued state of sin while you remain married" position until recently. Call me naive, but is this a recent phenomenon? Who started teaching this, when and is it tied to a certain denomination/religion/group?
I'm truly asking a sincere question because i've never heard such a thing. Can someone answer when this started, by whom? THanks!
No it's not a recent phenomenon, the early church did not view remarriage as the church does today.
Visit http://www.marriagedivorce.com
There is a whole section about the early church and how it viewed marriage and divorce compared to today's church view.
I have a radio broadcast with Attorney/Author and Pastor Charles Crismier entitled "The Erasmus Connection" which deals with the reformation and why the church changed concerning MDR.
Visit my audio site for the broadcast.
http://68.70.125.99:8081/
_____________________________
Cheryl
Why I repented of an adulterous remarriage &
cadz FAQ about Divorce & Remarriage
http://www.cadz.net/mdr.html
Visit my audio website http://www.cadz.net to listen to broadcasts on Marriage & Divorce
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 10:02:34 PM
|
|
|
Restored_Heart
Posts: 839
Joined: 7/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
lastblast
Concerning our differing opinions on the "adultery" clause and desertion issue, I am interested in your take of Mt. 19:9's "innocent" woman since you believe adultery frees one to marry another.
Matthew 19:3-9
3 Some Pharisees came and tried to trap him with this question: "Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife for any reason?"
4 "Haven't you read the Scriptures?" Jesus replied. "They record that from the beginning `God made them male and female.' 5 And he said, `This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.' 6 Since they are no longer two but one, let no one separate them, for God has joined them together."
7 "Then why did Moses say a man could merely write an official letter of divorce and send her away?" they asked.
8 Jesus replied, "Moses permitted divorce as a concession to your hard-hearted wickedness, but it was not what God had originally intended. 9 And I tell you this, a man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery--unless his wife has been unfaithful.
Cindy, no offense, but I think you are confused.... The innocent spouse in this case - if the wife had been unfaithful, would have been the husband. Had the husband been unfaithful, then and only then, would the wife be innocent in this case. BUT if you will notice, Jesus included that the unfaithfulness gives grounds to break the covenant through divorce.
As for scripture: We have given several passages in Corinthians, Mt that we keep debating...
I have given OT examples only to be told that the law has been thrown out....
Hardness of heart (illustrations in Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Matthew and Corinthians) is what causes the breakage of the covenant. The hard-hearted one breaks the covenant. In my case, my ex-husband committed the adultery (more than once), abandoned me and my children, and pursued the divorce. I am not bound to him, I allowed him to leave and divorce so that I might live in the peace to which I have been called. God is restoring me, through a second marriage - I know that you do not agree, but I KNOW what God is doing in my life - YOU do NOT. As I have previously posted, Romans 14:12-13, "12 Yes, each of us will have to give a personal account to God. 13 So don't condemn each other anymore."
< Message edited by hunterjumper777 -- 11/29/2005 10:39:14 PM >
_____________________________
<------- Lil Peanut.... due ~11/3
Yes, this will make 6...
Formerly Hunterjumper777
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/29/2005 10:44:47 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
1 Cor 7:10-11 and Luke 16:18 do not address adultery at all yet Jesus specifically calls it out in Matthew 5:32 and again in Matthew 19:9.
But Paul DID address adultery in Rom. 7:2-3. It doesn't dissolve the 1st marriage bond in the case of "extra marital" adultery or in the case of adultery committed by a remarriage.
Quote that until you are blue in the face and there is no bandwidth left. But you cannot deny the exception given in Matthew 5 and 19. You would like to, and it appears that you think if you quote the others enough, part of the word of God will evaporate. But that is not the case. It will not.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
The Mark 10 account is a repeat of Matthew 19 account. For whatever reasons the exception was not recorded in Mark but clearly exists in Matthew. We cannot excuse away these verses in Mat 5 and Mat 19 merely by wishing them away. It is clear that the other verses that do not mention adultery are the general case and the Matthew verses give specifics.
Yes, in Mk 10 Jesus speaks to His disciples IN PRIVATE........no mention of the ability to marry another after a divorce. I agree that Mt. gives an "allowance", but how you interpret that allowance doesn't "expand" the other teachings, your interpretation contradicts the clearer passages. Those clearer passages show a marriage BINDING even in the face of adultery (Rom. 7:2-3 AND EVEN Mt. 19:9, which shows the INNOCENTLY one put away UNABLE to marry again without committing adultery. Can you explain this?)
No, the others are not clearer. They are all clear. It just frustrates you that the exception clause exists and you try to explain it away by denying the word of God.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
Yes just as binding. And just as dissolvable. When the marriage covenant is abandoned by even one spouse, it is broken and dissolved.
Again, your viewpoint is disproven by Scripture. As is shown even in the Mt. 19:9 passage, the INNOCENTLY put away spouse is NOT FREE............the "bond" is NOT dissolved---even though the other has married again. If the bond were dissolved, then the "left" one would be free to marry another. We see the same teaching in Rom. 7:2-3............even if a woman DOES marry another (making her an adulteress), she will not be free from the bond of marriage until her 1st husband dies.................THEN, and only then, will she be 'free' to marry another. Paul never, in ANY of his writings/teachings, says that divorce or adultery DISSOLVES the "one flesh" that endures until death----quite the opposite.
No, not disproven and in fact, backed up by a whole lot more of the Bible than yours. Because you conveniently like to avoid the obvious definition of divorce. Jesus used the term. God used the term. And in all cases it was the dissolution of the marriage bond. This term was not debated by the Jews or by Jesus. It was well understood that it meant termination of the marriage bond. The breaking of the binding. The release from vows. The end of the marriage.
And it was well understood by the Jews that marriage after divorce was permitted provided the spouse was innocent or had atoned via sacrifice for any sin on their part. Interesting huh?
Again my viewpoint is backed up by the entireity of scripture. Yours is fabrication of a few verses from the NT strung together to build a house of theological cards.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
the scriptures clearly point out that for the estranged spouses to re-unite, they would have to marry again, but this is prohibited in OT scripture if one spouse has been defiled (i.e. married to another and I would posit, had sexual relations with another is sufficient for the defilement).
I think we have a good picture of what God expects in the Book of Hosea. Gomer "left" the marriage and went after other men. Was their "bond" dissolved in God's sight? No, it was not. Hosea went after his wife and brought her home. She was surely "unclean/defiled"..............yet their marriage was restored.
If the "vow" of a second marriage is what you are thinking is the binding factor here, it appears that Jesus doesn't even recognize the vow as binding. Otherwise He would never have called a second marriage a sin (adultery). The bond of the first marriage is what makes the second union, adultery.
Hosea was an allegory for the harlot Israel and their relationship to God. Note that at points God did divorce Israel but took them back again. At one point God said "or she is not my wife, and I am not her husband". Those are pretty strong words to use if you just meant estranged. And when they were away from God, they continued to play the harlot.
You can't use Hosea and Gomer as an example for what you are trying to show because that story was never intended to illustrate proper marriage by Hosea's life. It was intended to illustrate how Israel played the harlot using the marriage allegory so that the people of God would understand it clearly.
Therefore, your attempt to use it is an improper application of the story.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
Jesus called marriage after divorce adultery in the context of marrying an adulterous person who was just divorced. He did not address the innocent spouse nor did he address a repentant sinner who is clean. Once the sinner has repented of the sin, they are no longer committing adultery. Period. End of story. You cannot shackle God's forgiveness to man's ignorance.
Wait a minute Neuron. You are, on one hand, saying that adultery DISSOLVES the covenant of marriage. You give the example of an adulterous person who is put away committing adultery by entering into another marriage? Wasn't that adulterous person's 1st marriage dissolved through what you believe is a lawful divorce? If so, they would be free to marry again according to your thinking, right?
Never said that. Adultery is grounds for divorce. A hardened heart on the part of one spouse can begin to dissolve the marriage covenant in that they totally scrap it. Divorce occurs when the covenant is abandoned in the heart of one of the spouses completely. You cannot have a unidirectional marriage covenant. It is bi-directional or bust.
In fact, the only uni-directional covenant of significance mentioned in the scriptures is that of God with His people. He walked the covenant path in the presence of Abraham. Notice that only God did that. Only God can keep a covenant that completely.
So then, it is not an act of adultery that dissolves the marriage covenant. It is the willful abandonment of that covenant by one or both spouses. The formal legal paperwork merely mops up the details.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
No, they repent of their adultery. And then they continue to be a godly husband or godly wife to their spouse the remainder of their days. There is no other way and there is no NT scripture that teaches that adultery requires a special forgiveness or that understanding this principle requires special revelation.
Do you apply this same reasoning to other illicit relationships Neuron?
I apply forgiveness to sin.
What you are trying to force out of this is to catch me in saying something so that you can then point back to second marriage as a continuous sin, which it is not. The second marriage is not the sin. The path that led to it MAY have been sinful, except in the case of the innocent spouse that was divorced.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
Being married is not adultery. Not even a second or third or later marriage. Adultery is the sexual immorality that led someone to the state of being divorced. And it is not true that both spouses are adulterers. It could be, but it is quite common for their to be just one. Unless you can show scripturally where God is unable to forgive and forget these sins, then your counsel is of NO value.
Neuron, God is able AND willing to forgive ALL our sins as we confess and forsake them. You believe that being married after a divorce is not the adultery..........you will have a very difficult time proving that stance from God's Word. Jesus says "whosoever MARRIES a divorced woman commits adultery"...........you see, the adultery occurs with the NEW MARRIAGE. The "other" person/third person who enters the picture AFTER a divorce will be charged with adultery, if he marries a divorced woman. Jesus said it.
Being married is not a sin. I do not have to confess it as a sin. You will find it impossible to prove that second marriages are adultery for the innocent spouse. Why? Because they are not and Jesus said so.
You see, only you and a few others hold the opinion that a new marriage is adultery. Jesus doesn't think so. You are wrong.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
the Christian Pharisee would then require the innocent spouse that did not want divorce and did not sin to be bound to a broken and dissolved covenant and subsequently be the ones to serve out their sentence.
Again, Jesus prohibited marriage for a divorced person (Mt. 19:9, Lk. 16:18, Mk. 10:12, Mt. 5:32). Paul taught the same thing((I Cor. 7:10-11).
Jesus did not prohibit it. He said that an adulterer that gets married commits adultery. That is all. Stop adding to the word of God.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
You cannot continue a muder. Once committed it is done. Any additional murders are additional sins. This is an incorrect comparison on your part and a logical fallacy. God does not allow His followers to remain in sexual sin. And therefore once they repent of their sexual sins, they are clean.
You are right.......once you repent, any additional "doing" are additional sins. If one is committing adultery------meaning they are having UNLAWFUL relations with someone who is NOT their spouse.............how do they repent? Do they stay and continue the relationship with the person who is NOT THEIR SPOUSE? or do you believe that confession turns the person who was not a lawful spouse into a lawful spouse? Exactly at what point in a new marriage does it then become lawful-------the new vow dissolves the previous? The first sexual act after the vow? The realization that the new relationship is adultery and confessing that knowledge? I sincerely ask this: at what point is adultery no longer adultery?
No. No. No. No. No. No. No.
Stop it. Divorce is not the sin. New marriage is not the sin. You have a seriously flawed understanding of those concepts. When someone commits sexual immorality, they have sinned. If the keep this up, the other spouse has grounds for divorce. If they couple divorce, the innocent spouse that did not participate in the sexual immorality is free to remarry and is NOT GUILTY of the sin of the other spouse.
Also, the sinning spouse can repent and go on. But once they are divorced, it would require a new marriage covenant with the former spouse to return. But they do not have to return. It is up to the individuals.
There is no realization that the new marriage is adultery. That is your fantasy.
I seriously answer: adultery is one or more discrete and finite sinful acts. It comes to an end when the person completes the act. It remains then that they must repent of the adultery acts or series of acts.
HOWEVER, being married and having marital relations with a second spouse is NOT sin and is NOT adultery because it is sex inside the marriage covenant.
I seriously ask: when did an innocent person who was divorced against their will suddenly become an adulterer or adultress merely because their spouse sinned and dissolved the marriage covenant?
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
Causing children to stumble is a biblically condemned action. Using the sanctity of marriage as the covenant protection over children is scriptural. Second marriages are NOT adultery. Therefore the correct assertion is the children are a reason to continue to be a godly parent and remain in the family and keep it whole.
Yes, you are quite right Neuron. It is a serious thing to cause a child to sin (stumble), yet this is exactly what the majority of the church is doing today. The thing I see is that we are not conforming to His likeness, we are bringing Him down to our human likeness. Doing such WILL cause our children to stumble/sin and forsake the way of the Lord. These days are very much like what the Lord spoke in His Word: "Every man/woman is doing what is right IN THEIR OWN SIGHT"-----that is evidenced by the lack of scriptural support by many. "I think", "I feel", "It's not logical", "it's not fair", "I know what the bible says, but that can't be what it means"..........these are the mindsets of many in the "church" today.
I feel very sad for the legacy we are passing down to our children. Many of our children will not understand the Godly concept of "perseverence".........nor of dying to self for the good of others...........Many are saying "God wants me to have a Godly family and to raise my children in such"...........yet God HAS given that person a spouse and children, but the spouse is not desireable.........they are off into sin..........they are to be rejected and a "better" spouse sought in his/her place. I don't see Jesus in any of that. That type of mindset is completely opposed to what I know of the Lord and His mercy towards those in sin. The mindset that we shouldn't/don't have to suffer because of other's sins is something I can't find in scripture and a terrible thing to pass down to our children who will not be equipped to live the Christian life (it is no longer "I" that lives, but Christ who lives within me).
And you are doing what you think is right in your own sight. Self fulfilling prophecy there, as evidenced by the abundance of scriptural twisting by many.
I don't care what others think or feel or deem fair. I know that God requires us to repent of our sins. I know that God forgives our sins completely and forgets them. I know that God desires our compassion more than our sacrifice.
What you need to do is to seriously consider if you have taken this entire concept a little too far. You are using fallacies and illogical conclusions to fabricate your theological standing. And in the process you have added to and in cases removed from the word of God.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
I find it interesting that you claim that Jesus was teaching anything radically different from the OT. In fact, everything Jesus taught was to clarify the meaning and the application of the principles that were contained in the OT Law. In other words, He came to fulfill the Law, not throw it out.
I never said Jesus came to "throw out the law". Scripture teaches the "law" is good. Notice what He says immediately before He speaks of divorce/marriage as adultery in Lk. 16:16-18............Don't you find it interesting that the divorce/remarriage prohibition is placed just in that spot? I think it's significant.
You never addressed Deut. 24. Those who say it is applicable to us today-----the church and the teachings of the NT, need to compare apples to apples. This passage does not apply to us, nor does it line up with what Jesus taught on divorce/remarriage. Jesus DID clarify and and at the same time brought back what had been perverted by man. Even the disciples were astounded at His Words-------and they knew the "law"---so something WAS different and some things did change. When Jesus came to the earth----no longer is it an "eye for an eye", but now it is "bless those who curse you", give more to those who take from you, "forgive and give the opportunity to repent----don't stone to death"....................many things did indeed "change"...........but the changes were to bring us in line with God's very heart and mind. Do you think the divorce/remarriage rate is reflective of people having the heart and mind of Christ..........
I think it odd that Luke 16:18 is just kind of stuck in there in the discussion of the unrigheous steward. Again since Jesus Himself had already said that divorce for sexual immorality was allowable, this must be interpreted in that light. So then in this discussion on the unrighteous steward, we are given a list of things that are poor stewardship. And that includes your spouse. So then the Jews were loose in their use of divorce and it was considered poor stewardship.
Now because the Jews were under the Law and followed those instructions in the Law. This audience includes those that Jesus was addressing and they are Jews. It was therefore that Christ was speaking of those divorces which the Jews had done which were the frivolous divorces and not because of adultery. Because had they been for adultery, the adulterers would have been put to death by the Law. So then in Luke 16:18, Christ is addressing the frivolous divorces, not divorces for adultery.
Remember, context is king. Jesus was addressing Jews on the matter of their Law as given in out OT which includes Deuteronomy.
_____________________________
Click here for an example of God blessing a man with a second chance at marriage in a new wife.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 12:20:11 AM
|
|
|
Keabird
Posts: 942
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Thoughtfully and well said, Neuron.
I think we all often forget the context that Jesus was operating in at the time. Because we are used to thinking in today's terms, we forget that the Jews of the time were living subject to the O.T. and acting accordingly (or supposed to be!)
Each of us has our own innate sense of justice. How many of us, if we got to make the rules, would say to a spouse who had been cheated on, "well I'm sorry that happened to you, but even though your cheating spouse has now remarried, you're just gonna have to stay on your own the rest of your life, even though it wasn't you who did the cheating. Because your spouse sinned, you are now not allowed to know the joy of intimacy in marriage ever again on this earth." DUH. That is not justice and God is just.
He is also merciful to the one who has committed adultery, repented over time, and has come back to find the first spouse remarried and moved on. Justice might demand that spouse remain alone for the rest of their life, but GOD in His mercy kindly allows them another chance.
Does kind of remind me a bit of a testimony I read about a murderer. He went to prison, which was just. He was sentenced for life. After many years in prison, he heard the Gospel message and gave his heart to Jesus. He realized that he deserved to be in prison, and willingly accepted his fate. However, GOD in His mercy, arranged for him to be released just a few years later. He went on to live a healthy, Godly life, although he didn't deserve it. GOD is MERCIFUL and KIND. He gives people SECOND CHANCES. God is ABOVE the letter of the law. I am very grateful to Him.
_____________________________
"The thief comes to kill, steal and destroy, but I have come that you may have life and have it abundantly." John 10:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One | | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
