|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 2:15:37 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I hear the word "bound" to the original spouse for life until death, etc....
15But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. 16How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
17Nevertheless, each one should retain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to which God has called him. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts. 20Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him. 21Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ's slave. 23You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. 24Brothers, each man, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation God called him to.
I think the verses following that command are telling also SO if you are repentant or convicted when called on, you repent...you do NOT change the situation. Your REMAIN in the situation which you were in when God called you.
ALso does the part "if the unebeliever leaves (which means a lot) LET HIM NO LONGER UNDER BONDAGE...not under bondage-you are NO LONGER BOUND...becuase HE calls us to PEACE...you can say it doesn't say you can remarry-I can argue it doesn't say you CAN'T it ends with that. You are free to believe as you wish as well as I am also.
No longer under bondage in Greek (perfect passive-which refers to present state) Doolou--means no longer "enslaved" ...but you are free....what does free mean to you? It means I'm no longer enslaved to that marriage or that person.
Bound (as used in Rom. 7:2-3 and I Cor. 7:39) referring to the "one flesh" is a different greek word than the word used in I Cor. 7:15 (not under bondage). Yes, in that passage we see that a person is not obligated to be a slave/servant to this person who has chosen to leave/depart. Nowhere in that passage does Paul ever give permission to marry another. If we look back on I Cor. 7:10-11 we will see this same "allowance" given to a woman who has "departed"..........she is to remain UNMARRIED (she is not obligated to serve/be a slave) Or she can reconcile. In neither case does Paul ever state that the marriage is "dissolved" and either are free to marry another. The only place we find such an allowance by Paul is in Rom. 7:2-3 and I Cor. 7:39, where Paul specifically says that DEATH dissolves the 'one flesh' bond----giving right to marry another.
As to repentance, I believe when we are "called", as sin is made known to us, we are to depart from that sin. Becoming a new creature in Christ does not turn adultery into a lawful union. Staying in "whatever situation we are called in" does not pertain to sinful lifestyles/relationships-------otherwise those homosexuals who come to Christ involved in "marriages" and believe this passage relates to them, have a right to believe such. However, I think we both agree that is NOT what Paul was talking about. In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 2:16:37 PM
|
|
|
momfree
Posts: 146
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
It says husband and wife-not betrothed-
Also it says porneia (broad meaning) if you CHOOSE to use a narrow meaning that's up to you...it doesn't mean you are right or that it means fornication or the people (i'm sorry the jews) He was referring this to were just engaged....
If he meant fornication he would have SAID fornication-he used "porneia"
Mt. 1:18-24.........Mary and Joseph had not come together yet. They were betrothed. Joseph found Mary pregnant and was thinking of "putting her away"...........BEFORE Joseph had taken Mary to wife.........Just something to ponder. Blessings in Him, Cindy
The context and verses in Matthew are speaking to MARRIED COUPLES
I don't see how you keep throwing Mary/Joseph in the mix...and putting her away-it has no correlation to when he speaks to those that are MARRIED
_____________________________
"Peace is the absence of anger"
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 2:24:10 PM
|
|
|
momfree
Posts: 146
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
Bound (as used in Rom. 7:2-3 and I Cor. 7:39) referring to the "one flesh" is a different greek word than the word used in I Cor. 7:15 (not under bondage). Yes, in that passage we see that a person is not obligated to be a slave/servant to this person who has chosen to leave/depart. Nowhere in that passage does Paul ever give permission to marry another. If we look back on I Cor. 7:10-11 we will see this same "allowance" given to a woman who has "departed"..........she is to remain UNMARRIED (she is not obligated to serve/be a slave) Or she can reconcile. In neither case does Paul ever state that the marriage is "dissolved" and either are free to marry another. The only place we find such an allowance by Paul is in Rom. 7:2-3 and I Cor. 7:39, where Paul specifically says that DEATH dissolves the 'one flesh' bond----giving right to marry another.
As to repentance, I believe when we are "called", as sin is made known to us, we are to depart from that sin. Becoming a new creature in Christ does not turn adultery into a lawful union. Staying in "whatever situation we are called in" does not pertain to sinful lifestyles/relationships-------otherwise those homosexuals who come to Christ involved in "marriages" and believe this passage relates to them, have a right to believe such. However, I think we both agree that is NOT what Paul was talking about. In Him, Cindy
Homosexual marriage is not related and OFF topic....ALSO...you say it doesn't say they can remarry-it doesn't say you can't! It states if the wive believes she is to remain unmarried in a previous situation-but in this situation of an unbeliever departing it does NOT say the believer must remain unmarried or be reconciled-why woudl he make a distinction the 1st time and not the 2nd unless it was mean you are "free" what else do you think slavery/bondage means? Of course you aren't a slave to them physically, they left you...that doesn't even bare mentioning-it's a fact-Pauls telling us IF THEY ARE PLEASED to dwell with us...Paul states if the unbeliever abandons, you are FREE....no longer under bondage/slavery-this to me means exactly that...there is NO specification to remain unmarried as in previous verses is there?
_____________________________
"Peace is the absence of anger"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 2:34:31 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
The context and verses in Matthew are speaking to MARRIED COUPLES
I don't see how you keep throwing Mary/Joseph in the mix...and putting her away-it has no correlation to when he speaks to those that are MARRIED
Yes, I believe Jesus was addressing that group initially. However, because He said that their "putting away" was due to hardheartedness, it doesn't appear to me that He was uplifting the practice. Marriage He brings back to the creation intent. Once one is "joined" by God, they are one flesh until death. This is exactly what Paul taught, even in the face of adultery (Rom. 7:2-3). This allowance I believe is relating to betrothal. However, even if I did view it as allowing ONLY divorce for unrepentant adultery AFTER the marriage begins, one has a very hard time explaining away the last part of Mt. 19:9 if they believe the allowance is for remarriage as well because the previous is dissolved.
The man who marries the put away woman in Mt. 19:9 is charged with adultery by Jesus. If the divorce also allowed for remarriage due to the "bond" being dissolved, why would HE be guilty of adultery? The first husband has remarried (committed adultery) or if one interprets the woman as the guilty one, the divorce has dissolved her marriage right? Personally, I find the allowance to remarry a very contradicting position based upon other passages which show a very different picture of the marriage bond----which is joined by God into "one flesh"...........In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 2:49:28 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Homosexual marriage is not related and OFF topic....ALSO...you say it doesn't say they can remarry-it doesn't say you can't! It states if the wive believes she is to remain unmarried in a previous situation-but in this situation of an unbeliever departing it does NOT say the believer must remain unmarried or be reconciled-why woudl he make a distinction the 1st time and not the 2nd unless it was mean you are "free" what else do you think slavery/bondage means? Of course you aren't a slave to them physically, they left you...that doesn't even bare mentioning-it's a fact-Pauls telling us IF THEY ARE PLEASED to dwell with us...Paul states if the unbeliever abandons, you are FREE....no longer under bondage/slavery-this to me means exactly that...there is NO specification to remain unmarried as in previous verses is there?
Again, nowhere does Paul state that the marriage is "dissolved". Paul already addressed the nature of the marriage bond (indissoluable until death) in Rom. 7:2-3 to the Gentile Christians he was teaching. He didn't change it with married Christians and he didn't change it with those new converts who were married to unbelievers. The state of ones salvation does not change the nature of the bond of marriage..........it just changes our responses to whatever occurs IN the marriage. In the first part of I Cor. 7, Paul was addressing married BELIEVERS (husbands AND wives). He called both to hold to honor marriage. However, he realized that situations may involve the necessity of "departing"(unrepentant adultery, abuse, or such possibly). This was not the will of God, but if one did depart, they were either to remain UNMARRIED (meaning they were not SERVING their marriage partner) or be reconciled. In essence, there IS a freedom from bondage in that "allowance", yet also the acknowledgement that one is not "free" from the "bond", hence the prohibition to remarry.
There are those who would say that BECAUSE one will not reconcile or repent fast enough to suit them, they must be an unbeliever, therefore they apply I Cor. 7:15 to them and then further use I Cor. 7:15 as a reason NOT to remain unmarried------believing that SURELY God wouldn't expect me to remain unmarried for my whole life. Does God call some Christians to remain unmarried because they have a CHRISTIAN partner who won't "change" or won't reconcile or such, but allows other Christians to NOT remain unmarried and find another spouse? I dont' believe so. I believe He calls us all to the same standard, though those who are married to unbelievers may have a much tougher lot. Blessings in Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 3:09:45 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
lastblast, Paul uses the word divorce. Jesus uses the word divorce. It was clear to all the Jews that divorce meant "dissolved". So YES, Paul and Jesus point to several places where divorce was allowable and in ALL cases, divorce meant dissolved.
The thing is neuron, putting away does NOT dissolve the "one flesh"...........When Jesus charged those who married again (OR married divorced persons)with committing adultery, He clearly did not view the divorce as dissolving the "one flesh"................You can't commit adultery if you are not married or messing with someone who is married..............not possible. Either your understanding is wrong, or Jesus didn't really mean what He said............. In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 3:18:35 PM
|
|
|
Keabird
Posts: 941
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
Okay, I am gonna be brave and put in my two cents about one of the verses ... LOL
quote:
7. New King James Version (NKJV)
9And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality,[a] and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." - just chose this one at random from the list of quotes.
I will tell you how I read this and how I interpret this.
Firstly, Jesus was speaking to men, not women. Remember, in His day on earth, women had no say at all. Husband did exactly what they wanted with their women.
So Jesus, as people have pointed out, was talking about WHEN divorce is appropriate and when it is not. He is talking to the HUSBAND, not the wife.
So, let's look at possible examples from this verse.
1. The husband tells Jesus that his wife has been unfaithful. According to what Jesus said, in that case, divorce is reasonable and allowable. In that day, if a husband gave his wife a certificate of divorce, it freed him to marry again. Jesus does not dispute this, as far as I can see. So in that instance, the husband can remarry. The wife either gets stoned to death or "put away".
2. The husband tells Jesus that he got tired of his wife, even though she had been faithful to him, so he divorced her. According to what Jesus said, in this instance the husband is sinning against the wife, treating marriage frivolously. Jesus points out that because unfaithfulness hasn't been an issue, their marriage covenant still stands.
The husband says he has sent his innocent wife away. Then some other man comes along and covets her (and because of the custom of the time, the woman doesn't get much say) and marries her. Jesus said that second man who marries her commits adultery. At that point, the wife is still innocent! I think there is another verse - sorry there have been so many quoted that I can't recall which one it is  ) that says that the woman's first husband is the one to CAUSE her to commit adultery. So the husband is still held accountable, not the wife. If we look at it then, that the wife ends up committing adultery because of her husband caused it, then how would Jesus regard the wife? Is He going to condemn her? Of course not. So even though the rules say that she has committed adultery, He will not hold her accountable for it, but the husband who unjustly sent her away was actually responsible for the adultery, not her. How will Jesus view the second man who married her, unwittingly committing adultery against her first husband? Will He condemn him?
3. The husband divorces his wife because she has committed adultery. He then asks Jesus if SHE is free to remarry. According to the verse as already discussed, the husband is free to remarry. According to the LAW OF THE TIME, he is not free to take the first wife back, because she has been defiled. But what about her? he might ask. So, according to what Jesus said, she committed adultery. What can she do about it - supposing she hasn't been stoned to death but just put away? She can be forced to remain single for the rest of her days (this is back in those times). If another man then sees her and covets her, and the first man is no longer in a covenant because of her adultery, then the man might marry her. The first covenant was broken with the original adultery, so the second one is a new covenant.
So, in all these cases, if the woman was faithful, then she is not held accountable for her husband's unjustified divorce. The husband is held accountable. If she WAS unfaithful, then the marriage covenant can be dissolved. In that case, the husband is free to remarry. The wife is basically treated as others see fit, after that - she has very little say, as per the custom of the time.
So then, we come to today's world. Nowadays it is recognized that the HUSBAND is also capable of being unfaithful and is held accountable.
So suppose a wife says to Jesus, my husband has been unfaithful. According to that verse, it is reasonable and justifiable that she gives him a certificate of divorce, since stoning is no longer allowed 
Or, the wife says to Jesus, I divorced my husband, even though he wasn't unfaithful. I just didn't like him any more. According to the verse, she has sinned against her husband, and if he remarries, SHE causes him to commit adultery - she is to blame, not him. The woman who marries him unwittingly commits adultery against the first woman. How will Jesus view this? Will He condemn that second woman?
Then we finally come to our new life in Christ, and freedom from the rigorous law of Moses (I am sure none of you out there are sacrificing animals for atonement any more).
A new covenant applies now. It is the covenant of love, forgiveness and mercy. In all cases where there was adultery, the non-adulterous spouse is justified in divorcing. But now there are new options.
1. The faithful spouse can apply forgiveness, and choose to remain with the unfaithful spouse, if he or she is willing, to work through their issues. If the unfaithful spouse will not do that, the faithful one is free to divorce and then remarry (applying Jesus' verse as before).
2. The faithful spouse can apply forgiveness, but is not obligated to remain with the unfaithful spouse, and is free to divorce and remarry because the covenant has been breached through adultery.
3. The adulterous spouse, having been (justly) sent away through divorce, can receive the forgiveness of God. This does not obligate the first spouse to take them back. But it DOES mean that in the forgiveness and mercy of Christ, their sin of adultery is washed away. They are no longer married, because the first covenant was breached and declared dead with divorce, and they are a washed-clean single person. They can:
a) choose to remain single
b) receive a second chance from God to try and be faithful to a new covenant in marriage, if God gives them that chance
Concluding, nowhere do I see God condemning a faithful spouse. He always holds the unfaithful or abandoning spouse accountable (I call the spouse who was tired of being married the abandoning spouse). Nowhere do I see God telling a faithful spouse that they are bound to the covenant which has been breached by adultery or abandonment.
I see God considering "innocent" the spouses who have been sinned against through adultery. I see Him not blaming them if they remarry, but holding the adulterous spouse responsible if that happens. It is that although they have been put in a position of sinning themselves, God in His justice does not hold them accountable for that sin. So although they could choose to remain single, God will not hold it against them if they remarry.
I see God calling adulterous spouses to account. I see His gift of forgiveness to them. I see His grace towards them if they repent. I see Him offer them new opportunities to be faithful to a new covenant. He recognizes that the first spouse is no longer obligated.
I see God calling spouses who abandon their covenant to account. I see Him holding them accountable for subsequent adultery on the part of the spouse they unjustly divorced. I see God's gift of forgiveness to those abandoning spouses. I see His grace towards them if they repent. If the first spouse hasn't remarried, the abandoning spouse can offer to resume the original covenant if it has not been breached by adultery on either side since the divorce. But if the first spouse has remarried, then the abandoning spouse is not obligated to interfere with that new marriage, as the abandoning spouse was accountable for it in the first place. The abandoning spouse should not now create further problems for the spouse they abandoned, as they are called to live in peace, in Christ. I see God, in mercy, offer the abandoning spouse new opportunities to be remain in a new covenant without abandoning it.
So, there are rules. Then there is forgiveness. Then there is grace. Then there is mercy. And above all, there must be love. But nowhere is a faithful spouse TIED to an unfaithful one, except that they choose to be. They will not be condemned if they don't.
Hmm.. just writing all this out has helped me work through it quite well! Thanks!
And that is all I have to say about the Scriptural side of it.
Sherri
_____________________________
"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 Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 3:25:23 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
A note on Romans 6-7
Romans 6 spends the entire chapter talking about our relationship to the Law. Verses 1-14 discuss that we, as believers, are dead to sin and alive to Christ. Then in verses 15-23 Paul discusses our relationship to the Law and that we ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW.
Now in Romans 7, we see a continuation of the discussion of our relationship to the Law that was given in Romans 6. And in verses 1-6, an example of marriage is used to illustrate our relationship to the Law. Note this was not a disseration on marriage, but a disseration on our not being bound by the Law because we are dead to sin. What follows in verses 7-25 is a discussion about our struggles with sin and our old din nature.
Again, this is the point where you have to reconcile the illustration of marriage here with the exception given in Matthew. And this is an apples-apples comparison, because Paul is addressing "men who know the law". So then to conclude the Matthew was addressed to the Jews and then not applicable to Gentiles, one must also accept that Romans 7 is likewise not applicable. But we know it is.
We know that the NT was written to believers. And we know that we cannot throw away part of the scriptures. So then, we must reconcile the marriage until death here, with the marriage until death OR divorce for immorality in Matthew. I posit that it is clear to everyone that we cannot simply consider Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9 in error.
Therefore we see an apparent contradiction if we apply the strictest definitions of legal terms in both. However, that is not proper exegesis or hermeneutics.
Instead we must resolve the discrepancy. And it is simple. Paul refers to the general principle in Romans 7:2-3 that marriage is binding until death. Jesus refers to the specific application of an exception given for immorality in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.
This is not liberal theology. It is practical horse sense. Think about it. When you describe something, do you give all the precise details and exceptions at every turn? Usually not. So when in writing a letter, as Paul did, he was inspired by God to give the general principle. But when Jesus spoke in Matthew, He (God) was giving the exception.
Also to point out yet again, Jesus (God) knew what divorce meant, it mean dissolution, hence the way he referred to the disposition after the divorce as to the ex-spouses marrying again. All the Jews at the time knew this also. They knew that once divorced, you could marry again and there was no dispute about this in the scriptures. Anywhere. There is merely exceptions given for immorality and the abandonment by an unbeliever that allow divorce to occur. Which as is not disputed in the scriptures meant dissolution of the marriage.
So then, the dispute comes now, 2000 years later, when you try to apply post-modern thought and understanding of western culture to the Hebrew culture which was at that time, already ancient.
_____________________________
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 3:29:01 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
lastblast, Paul uses the word divorce. Jesus uses the word divorce. It was clear to all the Jews that divorce meant "dissolved". So YES, Paul and Jesus point to several places where divorce was allowable and in ALL cases, divorce meant dissolved.
The thing is neuron, putting away does NOT dissolve the "one flesh"...........When Jesus charged those who married again (OR married divorced persons)with committing adultery, He clearly did not view the divorce as dissolving the "one flesh"................You can't commit adultery if you are not married or messing with someone who is married..............not possible. Either your understanding is wrong, or Jesus didn't really mean what He said............. In Him, Cindy
The thing is cindy, every Jew knew that divorce did dissolve marriage. Only a few here seem to not understand that. Either your understanding is wrong, or Jesus did not know what the word divorce meant.
_____________________________
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 3:43:48 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Instead we must resolve the discrepancy. And it is simple. Paul refers to the general principle in Romans 7:2-3 that marriage is binding until death. Jesus refers to the specific application of an exception given for immorality in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.
The problem with that is: Paul gave the example of adultery in Rom. 7:2-3, yet STILL maintained that it was the husband's DEATH that freed the wife to remarry----not a divorce. In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 3:45:53 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
A note on repentance and reconciliation...
When you sin, you must repent. But how long does that take? You may never, or you may immediately? How long does someone else wait? Long enough, but you need not wait any longer.
I know that is not helpful. How long really depends on the situation. Consider the situation in 1 Corinthians 5 where there is a man who is involved in vile sexual immorality. Paul said in verse 4 to "hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed". Now we don't know how long it was going on. But in verse 3 Paul said that he himself had already passed judgment on the person.
Clearly a person needs opportunity to repent. But the time that should be allowed is unique to the persons involved and the offense itself.
So then, when a spouse does commit immorality/adultery in a marriage, I think it is clear that the innocent spouse must give them an opportunity to repent. How long depends on them. But it does not mean forever. There is clearly a precedent for requiring repentance of the errant believer and limiting the time they are allowed to take to do it.
Now that is clear from scripture. But now I want to throw out an opinion on how long. If a spouse who is otherwise faithful commits one act of immorality/adultery, I personally would not give them more than a couple weeks from the time I learned of it to confess the sin and repent.
Now if they had a history of failure, I think that I would apply the 3 strikes rule. And on that third strike, they would have 24 hours.
But again, that last part is opinion. Personally, having faced an adulterous spouse, I actually waited months because of the gravity of the situation (we have kids and so forth). In the end, the adultress filed for divorce and left. That was pretty clear to me that I waited long enough. They were not repentant. And in fact, they still aren't.
So it really depends on the situation. But no one is required to wait indefinitely, because even Paul tells us to remove immoral believers from our midst after they have been confronted and they do not repent.
_____________________________
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 3:48:14 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
Instead we must resolve the discrepancy. And it is simple. Paul refers to the general principle in Romans 7:2-3 that marriage is binding until death. Jesus refers to the specific application of an exception given for immorality in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.
The problem with that is: Paul gave the example of adultery in Rom. 7:2-3, yet STILL maintained that it was the husband's DEATH that freed the wife to remarry----not a divorce. In Him, Cindy
The problem is, that is the general case in Romans, and you are misapplying it from there.
_____________________________
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 3:48:26 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Cindy "The thing is neuron, putting away does NOT dissolve the "one flesh"...........When Jesus charged those who married again (OR married divorced persons)with committing adultery, He clearly did not view the divorce as dissolving the "one flesh"................You can't commit adultery if you are not married or messing with someone who is married..............not possible. Either your understanding is wrong, or Jesus didn't really mean what He said............. In Him, Cindy
quote:
Neuron "The thing is cindy, every Jew knew that divorce did dissolve marriage. Only a few here seem to not understand that. Either your understanding is wrong, or Jesus did not know what the word divorce meant".
You still didn't answer the question. How can a divorce "dissolve" a marriage, yet JESUS charge one with committing adultery AFTER the divorce? It is a hard question to answer holding such a stance. In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 3:52:19 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
Instead we must resolve the discrepancy. And it is simple. Paul refers to the general principle in Romans 7:2-3 that marriage is binding until death. Jesus refers to the specific application of an exception given for immorality in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.
The problem with that is: Paul gave the example of adultery in Rom. 7:2-3, yet STILL maintained that it was the husband's DEATH that freed the wife to remarry----not a divorce. In Him, Cindy
The problem is, that is the general case in Romans, and you are misapplying it from there.
Why didn't Paul use a "regular marital situation" then, if his intent was just to show the "general" case of marriage? Why even say that if one marries while a spouse is living, a woman will be called an adulteress? Why would Jesus say if one married a woman put away, they commit adultery? Obviously, neither divorce, adultery, remarriage "dissolve" the one flesh bond. That is why Paul and Jesus both taught this.... In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 3:53:38 PM
|
|
|
SmileyTish
Posts: 227
Joined: 6/23/2005
From: From the Edge of Beyond
Status: offline
|
I am choosing to bow out of this forum because I am too close personally to this issue. However, I'm just going to say that Neuron has better points than Cindy does. And since I have choosen to follow Jesus not the Law and Love is the Greatest gift of all, then we should just drop this subject and leave it to individual convictions.
_____________________________
I'm going crazy -- wanna come along?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 3:54:34 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
A note on Jewish divorce...
Here is an excerpt from a Jewish divorce article.
quote:
One of the major roles of a beit din [rabbinical court] today is to supervise gitten for divorcing couples. It is vital that a Jewish couple arrange for a get1 upon their divorce. Without a get, a couple remains married according to halachah even if they have obtained a civil divorce. Until the husband has given his wife a get, neither party may remarry. Should the wife bear a child from another man, that child will be a mamzer, and prohibited from marrying within the Jewish community.
The rest can be found here:
Jewish Divorce and the Role of Beit Din
_____________________________
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 3:59:10 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
Cindy "The thing is neuron, putting away does NOT dissolve the "one flesh"...........When Jesus charged those who married again (OR married divorced persons)with committing adultery, He clearly did not view the divorce as dissolving the "one flesh"................You can't commit adultery if you are not married or messing with someone who is married..............not possible. Either your understanding is wrong, or Jesus didn't really mean what He said............. In Him, Cindy
quote:
Neuron "The thing is cindy, every Jew knew that divorce did dissolve marriage. Only a few here seem to not understand that. Either your understanding is wrong, or Jesus did not know what the word divorce meant".
You still didn't answer the question. How can a divorce "dissolve" a marriage, yet JESUS charge one with committing adultery AFTER the divorce? It is a hard question to answer holding such a stance. In Him, Cindy
Cindy, divorce IS the dissolution of the marriage. That is the point.
_____________________________
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 4:03:22 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1545
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
A note on Jewish divorce...
Here is an excerpt from a Jewish divorce article.
One of the major roles of a beit din [rabbinical court] today is to supervise gitten for divorcing couples. It is vital that a Jewish couple arrange for a get1 upon their divorce. Without a get, a couple remains married according to halachah even if they have obtained a civil divorce. Until the husband has given his wife a get, neither party may remarry. Should the wife bear a child from another man, that child will be a mamzer, and prohibited from marrying within the Jewish community.
Sounds somewhat similar to what we see Jesus saying............people remain married in His eyes even though they divorce. In Him, Cindy
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 4:06:31 PM
|
|
|
Expos4ever
Posts: 24
Joined: 11/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: neuronstatic
This is not liberal theology. It is practical horse sense. Think about it. When you describe something, do you give all the precise details and exceptions at every turn? Usually not. So when in writing a letter, as Paul did, he was inspired by God to give the general principle. But when Jesus spoke in Matthew, He (God) was giving the exception.
Greeting Neuronstatic:
I think that you are making an astute observation here - it is simply nonsensical to expect that all the legitimate exceptions to a general principle be listed when the general principle is articulated. However, doesn't this insight also "open the door" to the possibility of other exceptions that have not been stated? I fully understand that you (or others) will counter that if Jesus had other exceptions to the general principle that "marriage is for life", He would have expressed them and they would be captured in the Scriptures. Maybe so.
I would go so far as to say it is also "plain horse sense" that certain other situations allow for legitimate divorce. Suppose Fred and Jane are 18 year-olds who make a wildly unconsidered decision to marry after knowing each other for 3 weeks. They then realize they basically having nothing in common. Could it not be the case that God would "allow" them to annul or dissolve their marriage? Obviously, there is no scripture that directly supports such a position. And one can argue that Jesus clearly specifies that if divorce is not for "sexual immorality", then it is not allowed by God.
However, I think that Matthew 12 clearly shows the limitations of scripture in codifying human behaviour - Jesus himself asserts that breaking the law is sometime necessary in pursuit of higher objectives. And again, I would apply your point - it is simply unrealistic to list all the exceptions to a general principle. So maybe we are left to figure some of them out for ourselves, applying the principle of love.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 11/30/2005 4:07:21 PM
|
|
|
neuronstatic
Posts: 980
Joined: 7/14/2005
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
I found another interesting article on Jewish divorce. And I thought this bit was interesting
quote:
According to Jewish law, a marriage is not dissolved until a bill of divorce, get, is exchanged between husband and wife.
The full article is available from here: | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
