|
SealedEternal -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (10/6/2008 10:50:45 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tn1
quote:
ORIGINAL: SealedEternal
Deuteronomy 22:13-19 "If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and says, 'I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a virgin,' then the girl's father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl's virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. "The girl's father shall say to the elders, 'I gave my daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; and behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, "I did not find your daughter a virgin." But this is the evidence of my daughter's virginity.' And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city. "So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him, and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl's father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.
A woman that was a virgin when her husband married her could not be divorced but must "remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days", so there were no "divorces" allowable after the betrothal period ended and he didn't challenge her virginity, or if he did and she proved she was one. Originally the woman who was not a virgin when her husband married her was to be "divorced" by stoning:
Your conclusion of this verse is errant. It was a virgin who was unjustly accused by her husband of not being a virgin who could not be divorced; if she was found to not be a virgin, she was stoned. By forbiding divorce in this specific situation, this law actually assumes that other divorces were allowed, not forbidden. This law certainly doesn't imply, much less state, that "there were no 'divorces' allowable after the betrothal period".
No, the Law established one variation from the one flesh marriage Law that God established from the beginning, but clarified that if the woman was a virgin at the time of the marriage, that they were bound together for life as the marriage Law had always been:
Genesis 2:21-24 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
This was confirmed by both Paul and Jesus:
Matthew 19:4-6 And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'? "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
Mark 10: 6-12 "But from the beginning of creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. "FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." In the house the disciples began questioning Him about this again. And He *said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."
Ephesians 5:28-33 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.
It is you that assumes that divorce is allowable for other causes, but you have failed to present any scriptural support for your assertation.
quote:
quote:
Deuteronomy 22:20-21 "But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father's house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
Then an additional regulation was added permitting a certificate of divorce rather than stoning, with the stipulation that he could not take her back if she married again:
Deuteronomy 24:1-4 "When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man's wife, and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance.
Deut. 22:13-21 forbids divorce in a specific situation, and thus assumes that divorce was allowed in all other situations not restricted by this law or others like it.
The text forbids all divorce from the time of marriage if the man's wife was a virgin. Again, you asume it was allowed in all other situations, but there is no verse anywhere in the Old Covenant Law, or the entire Bible for that matter that says anything of the sort, and it actually says repeatedly that divorce and remarriage results in adultery, which proves that divorce doesn't end a marriage, or else adultery couldn't be an issue.
quote:
Deut. 24:1-4 then forbids a man remarrying a woman whom he has divorced and she has subsequently married another man. It is a completely different situation, a completely different law. Deut. 22 forbids divorce in a specific situation. And Deut. 24 forbids remarriage in a specific situation.
No, it is the exact same situation but chapter 22 established the Law and chapter 24 added an additional regulation to it:
Deuteronomy 22:13 "If any man takes a wife and goes in to her..."
Deuteronomy 24:1 "When a man takes a wife and marries her..."
Deut 22 "...and then turns against her, and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her..."
Deut 24 "...and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes..."
Deut 22 "...and says, 'I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a virgin..."
Deut 24 "...because he has found some indecency in her..."
Both are speaking about the same scenario, but Chapter 22 established the Law and how it is to be implemented, while chapter 24 speaks of a man in that situation assuming that the reader is already familiar with the Law, and adds an additional regulation allowing for a bill of divorce rather than stoning, but since she is allowed to live it went on to state that he couldn't take her back if she remarried.
This is confirmed by Jesus when He said that fornication (porneia) is the only allowable grounds for divorce, and that any other divorce and subsequent remarriage is actually adultery:
Matthew 5:31-32 "It was said, 'WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE'; but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Matthew 19:9 "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for fornication, and marries another woman commits adultery. And the one who marries her who was put away commits adultery."
If there were other allowances for divorce to Old Covenant people, then Jesus' statements would be false, but He says that fornication was the only allowance which a man could put his wife away.
quote:
quote:
What you are claiming about paperwork being the issue under debate is false. It is only the Pharisees that were concerned about the paperwork issue, because they had falsely taught that if the woman was given the proper paperwork that the divorce was legal, but Jesus challenged that contention and focused on the cause of divorce, which was only supposed to be for premarital fornication according to the Old Covenant Law. Because their divorces were not done for the proper cause according to the Old Covenant Law, Jesus said their second so-called "marriages" were actually nothing more than extramarital affairs.
You're welcome to verify what the contents and focus of the "Any-matter" debate was by reading the Pharisees debate in the Talmud for yourself; or you can continue to assert your beliefs based on assumptions and ignorance concerning their beliefs.
If you regard the Talmud as superior to scripture, then that explains our different conclusions. Scripture states that Jesus was disputing the cause of divorce in the Old Covenant that the Pharisees were misapplying, while it was the Pharisees that were concerned about the paperwork. You take the word of the Pharisees which Jesus rebuked as abusing His Word, above His Word itself, while I regard His Word as taking precedence.
quote:
Furthermore, the OT only forbids divorce in a specific situation and does not even begin to legislate acceptable and non-acceptable reasons for divorce. Divorce happens because of the hardness of heart, however that is expressed, whether it's the one doing the divorcing or the one being divorced that is hard-hearted.
It only allows divorce for one cause anywhere in the Old Covenant Law, and you have not presented any scripture that states otherwise. Jesus Himself confirmed that the only permitted cause for Old Covenant people was fornication, so you are denying His statement on the subject, not to mention His uneqivocal statements saying that all divorce and remarriage is adultery without exception:
Mark 10: 6-12 "But from the beginning of creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. "FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." In the house the disciples began questioning Him about this again. And He *said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."
Luke 16:18 "Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.”
quote:
In Israel, mdr was primarily a personal/domestic affair under very limited civil authority.
Sadly the Israelites did not adhere to God's Law, but He established His Law of marriage from the beginning stating that He joins the two into one for life, and stated repeatedly that those who attempt to separate what He has joined, are not able to do so but are simply entering into extramarital affairs in remarriage.
quote:
quote:
So yes, "put away" can refer to either divorces with paperwork or without, because the term itself does not deal with the issue of paperwork.
I'm glad that you recognize that the word "apoluo" can signify either "illegal separation" or "legal divorce". Thus we are dependant upon other information to determine which English phrase to use.
No, we are to limit the term to what it means, and it doesn't deal one way or the other with paperwork. Jesus said that everyone who divorces and remarries commits adultery, so it means that this is the case with or without proper paperwork. You want to add this concept to the text to create a false distinction, but there is nothing in the text itself that indicates that paperwork has anything to do with the discussion.
quote:
As I've pointed out though, the Aramaic text indicates that in the passages where a woman is forbidden to marry another man, the woman is only separated from her husband and not legally divorced.
First of all you haven't proven that the Aramaic is specially inspired and the Greek is in error. Secondly, even you have not asserted that the other two Gospels were specially inspired in Aramaic and they say the same thing. Oh yeah, you have a completely different excuse why those don't mean what they say.
quote:
Not only that, but when Paul quotes Jesus in 1 Cor. 7:10-11, it is the woman who is separated from her husband, not legally divorced who is commanded to remain single. The man who divorces his wife is not commanded to remain single.
The woman is commanded not to leave her husband or to send him away, while he is commanded not to divorce her. As you are aware, women were not permitted to divorce their husbands which explains the slight distinction in terms. Beyond that, It's absurd for you to assume that the text is actually saying the husband can't legally divorce his wife and she can't illegally separate from him, but he may illegally separate from her and she may legally divorce him. Obviously it makes infinitely more sense to assume it means that she can't leave him and he can't divorce her as it says.
quote:
And as I've pointed out, in the Mark 10 passage, the words "apoluo" and "gameo" are both in the subjunctive mood and thus indicate purpose and intent. Thus the best interpretation is "divorces in order to marry another".
Then why does virtually every Greek translator disagree with you. And don't bother bringing up The Message, because that's a paraphrase and not a translation of the text. It's funny how your excuses change with each verse for why it supposedly doesn't mean what the text says.
SealedEternal
|
|
|
|