Divorce and remarriage

[swathdiver]

When Jesus spoke on marriage, it was for the Jews.  The apostle Paul gave the church age Christians doctrine on marriage.  The Good and Gracious Lord however knows our hearts and will forgive a couple who marries when they should not have.  Like any other sin, it can and will be forgiven if asked to do so by a repentant heart.  They can certainly serve God through his NT church but he cannot pastor a church or become a deacon.  A pastor should not marry them either.  

Verses 11 and 27 in the seventh chapter of the 1st Corinthians sums it up for us. 

[Invicta]

Thanks again for your replies.  I have found them very helpful, however I cannot subscribe to the view that Jesus' words only applied to the Jews.

When Paul wrote 2 Tim. 3:16  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:  He was speaking of OT scriptures and writing to a gentile Christian. 

 

[swathdiver]

Your proof text makes no sense in this case; you're out of context.  What Paul said contradicts Jesus and visa versa.  Since the scriptures are perfect and true, there has to be an explanation and I gave it to you.  Jesus was speaking to the Jews was he not?  All he was doing was pointing them back to Moses and the Law.  

 

Marriage is for life and if one gets divorced, remain single or be reconciled, that's all the scriptures provide for biblically.

[Ukulelemike]

Pau's words built upn Jesus' words. In Jesus' time, there were not any "believers', per se, as in born-again, blood-bought Christians. So Jesus' words were of course, correct. For the church, Pauls words added to Jesus' words. It is still true that the ony 'proper' reason to divorce is fornication, ie, acting upon adultery of the heart, a physical act of commiting fornication with someone other than their spouse. For believers, if a believer is maried to an unbeliever and the unbeliever leaves them, they are not under bondage to them. 

Of course, what we're dealing with in the OP is ostensibly two believers, and one leaves the other.  In the given case, the woman should be able to remarry, as he committed fornication against her-thus she is free. As well, while he MAY be a believer, he isn't living as one, and as such, he shoud be considered an unbeliever. A man who won't care for the needs of his own is worse than an infidel. We judge by fruits, right? So I'd say in all possible ways, she is worthy to be considered innocent in all this and able to remarry.

[swathdiver]

10 minutes ago, Ukulelemike said:

For the church, Pauls words added to Jesus' words. It is still true that the ony 'proper' reason to divorce is fornication, ie, acting upon adultery of the heart, a physical act of commiting fornication with someone other than their spouse. For believers, if a believer is maried to an unbeliever and the unbeliever leaves them, they are not under bondage to them. 

Absolutely not.  Paul gives the church age its doctrine on marriage and divorce, he makes no mention of what Jesus spoke of.  Verses 11 and 27 make clear that divorce is not for this age and should one divorce anyway, their only biblical options are to be reconciled or to stay alone.  Attempts to add what Jesus said and Paul said together is nonsensical and cause for confusion.  I'll repeat however, that the sin of divorce and marriage to someone else can and will be forgiven to a repentant heart.

[Heir of Salvation]

3 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

Pau's words built upn Jesus' words. In Jesus' time, there were not any "believers', per se, as in born-again, blood-bought Christians. So Jesus' words were of course, correct. For the church, Pauls words added to Jesus' words. It is still true that the ony 'proper' reason to divorce is fornication, ie, acting upon adultery of the heart, a physical act of commiting fornication with someone other than their spouse. For believers, if a believer is maried to an unbeliever and the unbeliever leaves them, they are not under bondage to them. 

Of course, what we're dealing with in the OP is ostensibly two believers, and one leaves the other.  In the given case, the woman should be able to remarry, as he committed fornication against her-thus she is free. As well, while he MAY be a believer, he isn't living as one, and as such, he shoud be considered an unbeliever. A man who won't care for the needs of his own is worse than an infidel. We judge by fruits, right? So I'd say in all possible ways, she is worthy to be considered innocent in all this and able to remarry.

^^^^^This^^^^^

According to the scenario in the O.P. she is free to remarry, and, I would add, nothing Biblically should prevent them from having a ceremony in the Church if so desired.

Edited January 24, 2016 by Heir of Salvation

[Invicta]

16 hours ago, Heir of Salvation said:

^^^^^This^^^^^

According to the scenario in the O.P. she is free to remarry, and, I would add, nothing Biblically should prevent them from having a ceremony in the Church if so desired.

Thanks, I was beginning to come to that conclusion.  

[Ronda]

DIVORCE:

Deuteronomy 24:1-4)
(speaking to Israel):
1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

Malachi 2:16
(speaking to Israel):
2:16 For the Lord, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the Lord of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.

Matthew 5:31
(speaking to the disciples):
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Matthew 19:3-9
(speaking to the Pharisees):
3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Mark 10:2-12 
(speaking to the Pharisees):
2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

Luke 16:16-19
(speaking to the Pharisees, as shown in verse 14):
16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

1 Corinthians 7:10-17
(speaking to members of the body of Christ):
10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.

1 Corinthians 7:39-40
(speaking to members of the body of Christ):
39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.
40 But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think also that I have the Spirit of God.

Romans 7:1-4
(speaking to members of the body of Christ):
1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

I am sure you are already aware of all of these verses (and likely more). I only referenced who the speaker was speaking to, and not what time frame I believe each corresponds to, or even if there is any difference... if there is no difference in time periods or dispensations to you, then I suppose that you would consider that they all apply? 

Regardless... I certainly won't give my thoughts on the matter, as you already have many/various to choose from, and have likely already reached a conclusion. 
But I will say that I believe there is a marriage which far supersedes any earthly marriage beween a man and woman on earth, and that is the marriage referenced in Romans 7:4 as well as Revlation 19:7-9

Romans 7:4 "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."

Revelation 19:7-9
7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.

Amazingly these same people are adorned in the same fine, clean, white linen! 
Rev.19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

Again, this doesn't help your dilemma, but it sure did help me to be reminded of the marriage which is above all other marriages! I do hope you prayerfully reach the answer for your church, in what you believe the word of God applies to the prospective husband and wife to be.

 

[Ukulelemike]

On ‎1‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 8:53 PM, swathdiver said:

Absolutely not.  Paul gives the church age its doctrine on marriage and divorce, he makes no mention of what Jesus spoke of.  Verses 11 and 27 make clear that divorce is not for this age and should one divorce anyway, their only biblical options are to be reconciled or to stay alone.  Attempts to add what Jesus said and Paul said together is nonsensical and cause for confusion.  I'll repeat however, that the sin of divorce and marriage to someone else can and will be forgiven to a repentant heart.

With all due respect, you're just plain wrong. What does "not in bondage" mean, exactly? If one is not free to remarry, then they are most certainly IN bondage.

As for Jesus, considering He told the disciples to "teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded". So if Jesus gave a clear command, then He expects us to follow it, as well.

The problem I have run into is that anyone, like myself, who sees that the Bible DOES, in some cases, allow divorce and remarriage, is somehow seen ad PRO-divorce, like HEY! It's a GOOD thing! In reality, most people who have been divorced, particularly Christians seeking to live for the Lord and find their spouse has other ideas and hit the road, are more against divorce than they were before. Having been through it, I always seek to help people find reconciliation when it is possible. I will recommend a separation to try to work things out, long before a divorce, save for issues of safety, and even then, if possible, I will try to see a marriage fixed, or at least the effort. Sadly today, too often, especially when a wife leaves a husband, they have emotionally and spiritually left the marriage years before they leave physically and it leaves little hope for reconciliation.

Divorce is a messy thing, and it is not God's design, but it is a reality and I think the thing we most have to be careful of is not punishing the spouse who was left behind. I have seen pastors who treat a woman, or even a man, whose spouse walked out on them, treat them like they are to blame, and that somehow they are in sin for their jerk of a spouse leaving them for someone else. Been there myself. If God can still use a former Christian killer to preach His gospel, then He can surely use a divorced person.

[swathdiver]

9 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

With all due respect, you're just plain wrong. What does "not in bondage" mean, exactly? If one is not free to remarry, then they are most certainly IN bondage.

Not at all.  Taken your way, verse 15 contradicts verse 11 and God is not the author of confusion.

Marriage is not bondage either, it is a holy union, a covenant before God that God blesses.

What bondage means here that if the departed return, one is not obligated to take them back, lie with them in bed, etc., unless they've reconciled.

That's the only way all of the verses in chapter 7 harmonize together and therefore are true.  Your way is wrong and confusing.  Please read the entire chapter, each verse.

Mike, most of the verses in chapter 7 repeat that divorce is not acceptable and Paul gives example after example and like you've been trying to get through Wretched's thick skull, words have meanings and it's so very important that we know the meaning of those words in the 17th century, not trying to apply today's dictionary like Wretched got sucked into doing and believing.

Coming around to this truth has big implications for you brother, you'll then see the answers to many unanswered questions.  

[wretched]

36 minutes ago, swathdiver said:

Not at all.  Taken your way, verse 15 contradicts verse 11 and God is not the author of confusion.

Marriage is not bondage either, it is a holy union, a covenant before God that God blesses.

What bondage means here that if the departed return, one is not obligated to take them back, lie with them in bed, etc., unless they've reconciled.

That's the only way all of the verses in chapter 7 harmonize together and therefore are true.  Your way is wrong and confusing.  Please read the entire chapter, each verse.

Mike, most of the verses in chapter 7 repeat that divorce is not acceptable and Paul gives example after example and like you've been trying to get through Wretched's thick skull, words have meanings and it's so very important that we know the meaning of those words in the 17th century, not trying to apply today's dictionary like Wretched got sucked into doing and believing.

Coming around to this truth has big implications for you brother, you'll then see the answers to many unanswered questions.  

HA, I had let this go and chalked it up to man-fed ignorance again but you bade me  "come back in" with this post.

Chapter seven moves very quickly and the contextual subjects change every 2-3 verses with only one or two exceptions.

Your reference to bondage in verse 15 has nothing to do with the context you quote, it is a new subject, only similar in shared words.

Verse 12 overtly begins a new contextual subject (similar as all in the chapter are, but distinctively different) so study it for yourself please. 

Now that you are done with that, check this out:

The gist of what is being explained to you in this thread is in the verses below (which is a gist of several subjects previous in the chapter), verse 28 obviously being a continuation of verse 27.

    27, Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.
    28, But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.

Out of curiousity, please explain the below subject which is related but a whole new context in this chapter: Give it a shot, I am curious if you can get it because this subject is the real message God wants us all to get out of this chapter:

    29, But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;
    30, And they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not;
    31, And they that use this world, as not abusing it: for the fashion of this world passeth away.

    32, But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord:
    33, But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.
    34, There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that   is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.

Now, I doubt you have notes from your preacher on this passage, it would drive away many of the tax payers in your church so try it on your own.

You are correct in one phrase of one line of your post: my skull is thick but only to man-made baloney.

 

 

[Ukulelemike]

Swathdiver said:

"Not at all.  Taken your way, verse 15 contradicts verse 11 and God is not the author of confusion.

Marriage is not bondage either, it is a holy union, a covenant before God that God blesses.

What bondage means here that if the departed return, one is not obligated to take them back, lie with them in bed, etc., unless they've reconciled.

That's the only way all of the verses in chapter 7 harmonize together and therefore are true.  Your way is wrong and confusing.  Please read the entire chapter, each verse.

Mike, most of the verses in chapter 7 repeat that divorce is not acceptable and Paul gives example after example and like you've been trying to get through Wretched's thick skull, words have meanings and it's so very important that we know the meaning of those words in the 17th century, not trying to apply today's dictionary like Wretched got sucked into doing and believing.

Coming around to this truth has big implications for you brother, you'll then see the answers to many unanswered questions."

 

No, verse 11 is dealing with married couples that are both believers, while 12-16 are dealing with a believer and unbeliever. believers are bound together in marriage, while if a believer and unbeliever, the unbeliever leaves, the believer is not bound to them in the way they would be to another believer, since it is clearly not God's will that we be unequally yoked together. So if the unbeliever departs, the believer is not bound to them they way they would be to another believer.  It is not confusing at all, it is two different circumstances that have two different rules applying to them.

Like even today, unbelievers often get married, and one might get saved, while the other rejects Christ. Should the one who rejects decide they don't want to be married to this "crazy Christian" anymore, and they leave the other, the believer is not obligated to them in the eyes of the Lord, because once the one was born again, the marriage began to become unequally yoked. Ideally, the believer should stay with them, should the unbeliever want to remain, and eventually the unbeliever may get saved-so we aren't free to just leave the unbeliever. But if the unbeliever leaves, the believer has no bonds to them, and is free from them.  It isn't difficult, nor is it at all confusing.

Edited January 26, 2016 by Ukulelemike
Specifying who I was answering

[swathdiver]

Verse 10: "Let not the wife depart from her husband"

Verse 11: "let not the husband put away his wife."

Verse 12: "let him not put her away."

Verse 27: "seek not to be loosed" and "seek not a wife"

Verses 12 through 14 give a darn good reason why the Lord forbids marriage and that is so people can get saved!  

After this post, I shall no longer comment on it.

Wretched, You do more violence to the Word of God by your continued denigrating a pastor teaching his flock.  Do you think this forum or some extra biblical book is better than sitting in a pew, in a New Testament Church, being discipled by the pastor?  I love my pastor and kindly ask that you refrain from even mentioning him.  

[wretched]

11 hours ago, swathdiver said:

Verse 10: "Let not the wife depart from her husband"

Verse 11: "let not the husband put away his wife."

Verse 12: "let him not put her away."

Verse 27: "seek not to be loosed" and "seek not a wife"

Verses 12 through 14 give a darn good reason why the Lord forbids marriage and that is so people can get saved!  

After this post, I shall no longer comment on it.

Wretched, You do more violence to the Word of God by your continued denigrating a pastor teaching his flock.  Do you think this forum or some extra biblical book is better than sitting in a pew, in a New Testament Church, being discipled by the pastor?  I love my pastor and kindly ask that you refrain from even mentioning him.  

Sorry Swath, your interpretation is so sadly lacking that I will just blame you then..how would that be?  Don't pout about it just realize that you should be past the point of dependence on any man's teaching. You should be verifying and studying Scripture yourself. Even if your guy is half qualified, it is not his job to teach you God's Word after a year or two. His job at your point is to edify and motivate, not bottle feed. Keep worshiping men and you will be sorely disappointed sooner or later and that you can believe with all certainty.

[John81]

8 hours ago, wretched said:

Sorry Swath, your interpretation is so sadly lacking that I will just blame you then..how would that be?  Don't pout about it just realize that you should be past the point of dependence on any man's teaching. You should be verifying and studying Scripture yourself. Even if your guy is half qualified, it is not his job to teach you God's Word after a year or two. His job at your point is to edify and motivate, not bottle feed. Keep worshiping men and you will be sorely disappointed sooner or later and that you can believe with all certainty.

It's true no pastor or anyone else is perfect. The Lord graciously gave us His Word and calls us repeatedly to be in the Word, study the Word, know the Word and live by the Word. Our pastors are to help us in this but they are not infallible and we must check what they say by the Word and accept the Word is always right.

Our pastor is a wonderful man of God, a very good preacher and teacher, and honest enough to admit he's still growing in the Lord, still learning, and often points out he doesn't want us to take his word as gold and truth but to personally open our Bible, read and study for ourselves. That is so much better than some pastors I've had in the past who tried to put on an air of perfection.

As to the divorce and remarriage issue, if we simply read and accept the instruction given in the Gospels and Epistles on the matter it's rather plain and clear. What has muddled things up are rules added by man much as the Pharisees added their own rules to those God gave them in the OT.