Jump to content
Online Baptist

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Many point to this passage to teach divorce and marriage in the case of adultery:

 

Matthew 19:9  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.

similar wording is also found in Matthew 5

I believe the exception clause refers to

1. Incestuous marriages (See Leviticus 18) (I also believe all sodomite "marriages" and sad that I have to say in our time and age but beastiality "marriages" would also be invalid as well, though I realize our passage in question relates to husband putting away a wife)
2. Betrothal unfaithfulness

Matthew 1:19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

Deuteronomoy 22:13-21

If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,
And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:
Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:
And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her,saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.
And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;
And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil

Some other things to consider:

1. The NT teaching for Husbands
Eph 5:25-28
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

If Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, how can we justify someone putting his wife away for adultery? Does Jesus divorce us and end his relationship with us when we are unfaithful to him?

2. Suffering for righteousness

1 Peter 2:20-21 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

3. God hates divorce

2:14-16 Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.
And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.
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 19:4-8 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
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?
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
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.

4. Other NT Passages

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

Romans 7:2-3

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.
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.

5. When you make a vow that "Till death do us part" I do not believe adultery gives you the right to break that covenant and promise you made to your spouse to love them and care for them "Till death do us part". 

6. If you were committing adultery, would you want your spouse to divorce you? or would you want her to love you and pray for you until you came to a place of repentance? We are to do to others as we would have done unto ourselves.

Just some final notes, I do not see how the verse in Corinthians that says "is not under bondage" can mean they are free to remarry, in my opinion that is something read into the passage. Also I realize that under the Law of Moses God allowed remarriage, however, it is said that was for the hardness of their hearts, I do not think God ever was happy with any kind of divorce, God clearly hates divorce, and New Testament Christians should go far beyond the letter of the law of the Moses because we have the Spirit of God indwelling us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I am surprised that no one has chimed in with a further response to this.

I think Jordan has done a good job of outlining the various passages involved

On ‎4‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 12:32 AM, Jordan Kurecki said:

If Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, how can we justify someone putting his wife away for adultery? Does Jesus divorce us and end his relationship with us when we are unfaithful to him?

This statement is a particularly good one, and one that anyone who promotes divorce MUST answer.

 

One thing I would like to add to point 3 is that people often state that God commanded divorce, but if you note this passage, you find that the Pharisees are the ones who use the term "command" but in response, the Lord uses the term "suffered you" or allowed them - very different to "commanded". And Jordan also pointed out very rightly that Matthew 19 where this conversation is found, also says that Moses suffered it because of the hardness of their hearts.

Personally, I think the only "terms" for divorce from a Christian, is where they have a heart that is so hard as to no longer want to honour God.

 

In relation to the idea that God has commanded divorce, I had someone bring up the situation of Ezra chapters 9 and 10, and state that God not only commanded their divorce from "strange wives" but was also pleased with it.

When I studied that passage out I found that God neither commanded it nor stated his pleasure over it.

When the people were confronted with the command of God regarding marrying strange wives, THEY decided to put away those wives - they were not commanded to.

They were commanded to repent of the sin of taking strange wives, and told to do His pleasure, but it was their idea.

In this instance God allowed it, but again, he did not command it.

I am basically in agreement with Jordan on this matter, and commend him on his research and presentation.

And my reference previously to Hosea was basically in support of the idea that God does not divorce us, as his commands to Hosea with regard to his unfaithful wife show.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
9 hours ago, DaveW said:

I am surprised that no one has chimed in with a further response to this.

Oh, I definitely have thoughts on the matter; but there is simply no way that I can add yet another heavy doctrinal discussion to my schedule.  I am already a bit overloaded with that in which I am involved at present.  

One thought for consideration -

Does "hardness of heart" refer to an unforgiving heart (that is -- the refusal of the one against whom the fornication was committed to forgive)?
Or does "hardness of heart" refer to an unrepentant heart (that is -- the refusal of the one who has committed the fornication to repent thereof)?

If the first is the case, then Joseph's consideration to put away Mary (when he thought that she had committed fornication against him) would indicate a "hardness of heart" in Joseph's case.  Yet to me such an accusation against Joseph seems completely contrary to that which is revealed in Matthew 1 about his character and consideration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I was married to a man who thought it was funny to beat my children, turn off the telephone, take my car keys, refuse to give me money for food. He finally snapped and threw me and the kids out of the house at the business end of his shotgun. He filed for divorce. I didn't want to even THINK about trying to reconcile with him. 

Now I'm married (and have been for about 20 years) to a Jesus loving, praying, loving his wife man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
22 hours ago, Saved41199 said:

I was married to a man who thought it was funny to beat my children, turn off the telephone, take my car keys, refuse to give me money for food. He finally snapped and threw me and the kids out of the house at the business end of his shotgun. He filed for divorce. I didn't want to even THINK about trying to reconcile with him. 

Now I'm married (and have been for about 20 years) to a Jesus loving, praying, loving his wife man.

Well, your statements sure do appeal to emotion. But what about God's word?

I am sorry you had to go through that, and I am glad by the grace and mercy of God he has allowed you to be married to a man who loves the Lord. 

However, just because God has been merciful and gracious to you does not mean he endorses remarriage or divorce. 

I got saved because a guy did drugs with me and witnessed to me, God was gracious and merciful, but the fact that I got saved does not mean God approved of my friends behavior and the way he was living.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 8/24/2018 at 4:25 PM, Jordan Kurecki said:

Well, your statements sure do appeal to emotion. But what about God's word?

I am sorry you had to go through that, and I am glad by the grace and mercy of God he has allowed you to be married to a man who loves the Lord. 

However, just because God has been merciful and gracious to you does not mean he endorses remarriage or divorce. 

I got saved because a guy did drugs with me and witnessed to me, God was gracious and merciful, but the fact that I got saved does not mean God approved of my friends behavior and the way he was living.

Now...for a few questions...the marriage covenant is defined in Ephesians 5, correct? There's quite a few verses that define the husband's duty to the wife, right? Jesus also said "except for fornication", right? 

So...husband is abusive...violates the marriage covenant in Ephesians 5, correct? Especially the part about loving his wife as he loves his own body, right? 

Then there's the fornication aspect...someone who watched hard core porn while his wife and children were 800 miles away taking care of her parents. 

Last, but not least, he was NOT a Christian and it is written that if the non-believing spouse wishes to leave, let them leave, right? 

So...don't expend energy jumping to conclusions when you don't know the full story. 

Have a great weekend. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
17 minutes ago, Saved41199 said:

Now...for a few questions...the marriage covenant is defined in Ephesians 5, correct? There's quite a few verses that define the husband's duty to the wife, right? Jesus also said "except for fornication", right? 

So...husband is abusive...violates the marriage covenant in Ephesians 5, correct? Especially the part about loving his wife as he loves his own body, right? 

Then there's the fornication aspect...someone who watched hard core porn while his wife and children were 800 miles away taking care of her parents. 

Last, but not least, he was NOT a Christian and it is written that if the non-believing spouse wishes to leave, let them leave, right? 

So...don't expend energy jumping to conclusions when you don't know the full story. 

Have a great weekend. 

Where does it say that if someone violates the marriage covenant in Ephesians 5 that you are free to divorce?

 And if it did, does that mean your husband can divorce you for not submitting to him even once? (Ephesians 5:24 says wives are to be subject to their husbands in "everything")

Can you explain to me how many times those commands in Ephesians 5 have to be broken before you can divorce?

Where does Ephesians 5 say "if your spouse does not do this, they have broken the marriage covenant and you can now divorce them"?

According to the same reasoning can children can dissolve their relationship with their parents if their father provokes them to wrath based on Ephesians 6:3?

I gave clear possibilities in my original post of what the "except for fornication" clause means, and I then listed several passages that make it clear that God hates divorce and I showed passages that refute the idea of divorce and remarriage. it says GOD HATES IT!

Do you believe me God makes approves for someone to do something that he HATES? 

If fornication is grounds for divorce, can any woman leave her husband based on the fact that Jesus said if you look at a woman to lust after her you have committed adultery with her already in your heart? so basically any woman can divorce her husband then?

The bible says to allow an unbeliever to leave, but where does it clearly say the believer is free to remarry after the unbelieving leaves.

It says they are not under bondage to the spouse, how do you know that means "Free to remarry"

Don't we need to interpret passages in the bible that are not as clear with ones that are clear? where is the Bible clear that God allows for remarriage while the previous spouse is living? Isn't it based on reading one's own ideas into phrases like "except it be for fornication" or "is not under bondage"?

 

Edited by Jordan Kurecki
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

@Jordan Kurecki how about you just don't worry about it. Your interpretations are YOUR interpretations. 

Thank you I'll take the word of my pastor over yours any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Have a great weekend.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
16 minutes ago, Saved41199 said:

@Jordan Kurecki how about you just don't worry about it. Your interpretations are YOUR interpretations. 

Thank you I'll take the word of my pastor over yours any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Have a great weekend.

 

It's not my word, it's the words of God, and when you stand before God you won't be judged by the words of your Pastor or me, but the words of God. 

Edited by Jordan Kurecki
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, Jordan Kurecki said:

It's not my word, it's the words of God, and when you stand before God you won't be judged by the words of your Pastor or me, but the words of God. 

and you have the audacity to speak for God? It's your word. 

spend some time researching the historical and cultural context of what was written. It's a whole lot deeper than your interpretation. Spend some time doing it. Consult reference works. This is the sort of thing that will take you months to research. Trust me, I've done it. I think I spent upwards of 100 hours researching it. I wrote a paper on it in college (Liberty University class of 2013, Bachelor's of Biblical Studies). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
8 hours ago, Saved41199 said:

and you have the audacity to speak for God? It's your word. 

spend some time researching the historical and cultural context of what was written. It's a whole lot deeper than your interpretation. Spend some time doing it. Consult reference works. This is the sort of thing that will take you months to research. Trust me, I've done it. I think I spent upwards of 100 hours researching it. I wrote a paper on it in college (Liberty University class of 2013, Bachelor's of Biblical Studies). 

 

Why should your claim to having spent 100 hours on researching this topic convince me? You are using a logical fallacy of appealing to your self as an authority, simply because you spent 100 hours researching something and have a bachelors degree does not mean you are right. 

Now, I included a ton of scriptures references about this topic in the original post, and I dealt with a lot of things, and while I am not nearly as detailed as someone like Pastor Markle, I believe I have included far more evidence about the topic than you.

I would encourage any readers to take note that you replied to this thread with 

1. An emotional appeal based on the pain and suffering from your first marriage

2. unsubstantiated assumptions based on passages in Ephesians 5 and 1 Corinthians 7, you also avoided my clear questions when I asked where in those passages they teach what you claim

3. an appeal to the authority of your Pastor 

4. an subtle ad hominem attack on me "

Your interpretations are YOUR interpretations:

"Thank you I'll take the word of my pastor over yours any day of the week and twice on Sunday."

5. an appeal to your own experience/expertise

 

Again, since you have spent so much time studying on this topic, than surely you should be able to answer the following questions for me:

 

Where does it say that if someone violates the marriage covenant in Ephesians 5 that you are free to divorce?

 And if it did, does that mean your husband can divorce you for not submitting to him even once? (Ephesians 5:24 says wives are to be subject to their husbands in "everything")

Can you explain to me how many times those commands in Ephesians 5 have to be broken before you can divorce?

Where does Ephesians 5 say "if your spouse does not do this, they have broken the marriage covenant and you can now divorce them"?

According to the same reasoning can children can dissolve their relationship with their parents if their father provokes them to wrath based on Ephesians 6:3?

I gave clear possibilities in my original post of what the "except for fornication" clause means, and I then listed several passages that make it clear that God hates divorce and I showed passages that refute the idea of divorce and remarriage. it says GOD HATES IT!

Do you believe God makes approval for someone to do something that he HATES? 

If fornication is grounds for divorce, can any woman leave her husband based on the fact that Jesus said if you look at a woman to lust after her you have committed adultery with her already in your heart? so basically any woman can divorce her husband then?

The bible says to allow an unbeliever to leave, but where does it clearly say the believer is free to remarry after the unbelieving leaves?

It says they are not under bondage to the spouse, how do you know that means "Free to remarry"?

Don't we need to interpret passages in the bible that are not as clear with ones that are clear? where is the Bible clear that God allows for remarriage while the previous spouse is living? Isn't it based on reading one's own ideas into phrases like "except it be for fornication" or "is not under bondage"?

 

I would appreciate you responding to these questions of substance, rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks on me, or appeals to authority such as your Pastor or yourself. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, Saved41199 said:

Look Jordan, I don't have to justify anything to you. You can continue on your merry way and do your thing. I'm not under authority to you and have no reason to answer your interrogations. 

Have a great day

Well, Maam, you are the one who made the decision to join this thread to make your point. If you aren't willing to address the arguments that I make then you should probably refrain from coming in here and basically saying that I am wrong without giving any substance or reasons why.

If you don't want to actually engage the subject but just want to spout off your opinions without giving any biblical evidence, then in my opinion, you should refrain from posting.

What was your purpose in posting here in the first place?

I am not so much interested in giving you a chance to "justify yourself" as much as I am in making it evident to anyone who reads this thread that you are arguing in favor of divorce and remarriage without any arguments of substance, I desire for readers to see that you are making claims that you are not backing up and that you seem to be speaking on your own authority rather than the authority of the word of God. While you did reference a few scriptures, I gave you ample opportunity with my clear-cut questions to explain and prove your claim but you have not done so. 

I believe if you aren't willing to defend your position, then you stop coming in here and making posts to try and contradict what I have said.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, Jordan Kurecki said:

If you don't want to actually engage the subject but just want to spout off your opinions without giving any biblical evidence, then in my opinion, you should refrain from posting.

i did give you biblical evidence. You chose to ignore it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, Saved41199 said:

i did give you biblical evidence. You chose to ignore it. 

No you did not.

You made a vague reference to Ephesians 5 and you implied that if a man fails to obey the commands of God in Ephesians 5 that it allows for divorce. that is not biblical evidence that is you adding something and reading something into the text that it doesn't say.

You also reference "except it be for fornication", which I dealt with and addressed in the first post. I gave examples of how this phrase does not have to mean if a man commits sexual sin during the marriage union. You ASSUME that it refers to adultery and you actually are the one ignoring the cultural customs of that day, fornication before marriage was legitimate grounds to end the betrothal period in the Jewish culture and context and would be considered as such. Even if MOSES wrote and allowed for divorce, it doesn't even say GOD did allow it, we are not under the law, and NT Christians should not have hardness of heart. I can hardly see God approving a decision made out of hardness of heart.  Let me remind you what Jesus said: 

6  Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

The NT is clear, a woman is to remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. 

for you to say that the references in Matthew allow an NT Christian to divorce for sexual sin, would be to violate the character of God and several plain passages in the scriptures. 

My questions give you ample opportunity to explain your position and they are great opportunities to defend your position. 

Making two vague references to passages and forcing them to say what they do not say, is not "biblical evidence".

You did not deal with a single one of the points I made in the original post. 

Your replies have little to no substantial argumentation. 

 

 

 

Edited by Jordan Kurecki
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Does “Not Under Bondage” Mean Divorce Is Permitted?

The word rendered “bondage” (1 Cor. 7:15) is the Greek term douloo, which means “to make a slave of.” Observe how the word is translated in Titus 2:3 — “enslaved to much wine.”

Biblically speaking, marriage is never viewed as slavery! The “bondage,” i.e., enslavement, does not refer to the marriage union. If the unbeliever departs, that is not the Christian’s responsibility. The brother or sister is not enslaved to maintain a togetherness (note the allusion of 1 Cor. 7:5) at the expense of fidelity to the Lord.

Interestingly, douloo (under bondage) in verse 15 is, in the Greek Testament, a perfect tense form, dedoulotai. The perfect tense denotes a present state resulting from past action. Its force here is this: “was not bound [past action] and is not bound [present state].” The sense of the verse thus is:

Yet if (assuming such should occur) the unbeliever separates himself, let him separate himself: the brother or sister was not [before the departure] and is not [now that the departure has occurred] enslaved ....

Whatever the “bondage” is, therefore, the Christian was not in it even before the disgruntled spouse left. But the saint was married (and is) to him, hence, the bondage is not the marriage!

Let the reader substitute the word “marriage” for “bondage,” giving the full force to the perfect tense (i.e., “has not been married, and is not married”) and the fallacy of viewing the bondage as the marriage itself will be apparent.

First Corinthians 7:15 does not expand upon the Savior’s teaching with reference to divorce and remarriage, as much as some wish that it were so.

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/683-what-is-the-meaning-of-not-under-bondage-1-cor-7-15

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

"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." - 1 Corinthians 7:15

 

This teaches that the Christian is not obligated to share their bed with the departed if they're not reconciled.  No popping in for a quick visit to satisfy one's need and then leaving.  You might ask me where I got that but do not remember.  Either from the pulpit or Way of Life or the old Baptist Challenge.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

Hi, looks like all of you have studied the topic more than I have, so I won't say too much.

My first thought when reading the OP and a few of the responses was, Jesus won't devorce us, but God DID devorce Israel.

Secondly, wasn't Joseph engaged to Mary, not Married?

Thirdly on Hosea, The LORD overlooked all sorts of imorality of the wives beause it wasn't as important as spiritual imorality.

Ho 4:12 My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff declareth unto them: for the spirit of whoredoms hath caused [them] to err, and they have gone a whoring from under their God.
Ho 4:13 They sacrifice upon the tops of the mountains, and burn incense upon the hills, under oaks and poplars and elms, because the shadow thereof [is] good: THEREFORE your daughters shall commit whoredom, and your spouses shall commit adultery.
Ho 4:14 I will not punish your daughters when they commit whoredom, nor your spouses when they commit adultery:

Fourth, Any man who as much as looks at another woman the wrong way is an adulterer, so it isnt an uncommon sin, and all have sinned, and isn't that the point of the discourse in Matt, which is summed up as 'be ye perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect', if you want to keep the Law that is, but until you reach that lofty hight, you will need to learn to recieve and walk as a sinner in Grace.

Fifth, If God suffred Divorce under Law, would Christ not suffer it even more so under Grace?

 

Edited by Rab
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

It's always difficult to have this conversation since there are 3 basic positions

1. No Divorce under any circumstance
2. Divorce is allowed for Fornication
3. Divorce is allowed for any reason

There are many passages, but the two key passages are found in Matthew and 1 Corinthians, which have already been referenced above.

Jesus said "Except for Fornication". - To understand this passage, one must understand Jewish Marriages. We have an "Engagement Period" today in which a ring is given, but no vows are given. In Bible times, Joseph and Mary were Espoused according to Luke and Married according to Matthew. Is this a contradiction? Luke is looking at it from a physical standpoint and Matthew the legal. Joseph and Mary were "Legally married" as they were espoused to each other. However, they had not consummated the marriage yet which is why Luke uses the word "Espoused Wife". During the Espousal period, a couple are legally married and it is during this time if one were to "Cheat" on the other, God allowed the divorce. It is important to notice that Jesus used the word "Fornication" instead of "Adultery". During the Espousal period, if one "Cheated", it would have been "Fornication". However, once the marriage is consummated, it is no longer "Fornication", it is now "Adultery".

1 Corinthians is a little more difficult to explain, but I will deal with that one later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I would like to post a 4th position through scripture that has nothing to do with Fornication.

1 Corinthians 7:12-15 (KJV) 
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. 

This "exception clause" is for those that are saved either before or after marriage, and if the spouse is refusing to believe, wants nothing to do with the Christian beliefs and lifestyle and refuses to abide in them, but says "either your God goes, or I go"; then you as the saved are not under bondage to the marriage vow.

Edited by 2bLikeJesus
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
10 hours ago, 2bLikeJesus said:

I would like to post a 4th position through scripture that has nothing to do with Fornication.

1 Corinthians 7:12-15 (KJV) 
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. 

This "exception clause" is for those that are saved either before or after marriage, and if the spouse is refusing to believe, wants nothing to do with the Christian beliefs and lifestyle and refuses to abide in them, but says "either your God goes, or I go"; then you as the saved are not under bondage to the marriage vow.

I will get into this passage at some point. Unfortunately, I do not have time right now.

The key to any doctrinal discussion is one understanding - Scripture cannot contradict Scripture and Jesus cannot go against Scripture. Notice the below passage. Jesus said "But from the beginning it was not so." Also notice "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

These two key phrases mean that God never intended divorce in any circumstance and that Jesus restated it.

On ‎4‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 12:32 PM, Jordan Kurecki said:

Matthew 19:4-8 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
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?
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
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.

The Apostle Paul would never under inspiration contradict God or Jesus. So when you are looking at 1 Cor. you must keep this in mind. Often times people take one verse to prove a point. You must use all Scripture.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 9/19/2018 at 8:52 AM, Pastorj said:

The Apostle Paul would never under inspiration contradict God or Jesus. So when you are looking at 1 Cor. you must keep this in mind. Often times people take one verse to prove a point. You must use all Scripture.

Exactly, and this is why the doctrine of marriage is found in 1st Corinthians 7 and not Matthew for the New Testament Christian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
9 hours ago, swathdiver said:

Exactly, and this is why the doctrine of marriage is found in 1st Corinthians 7 and not Matthew for the New Testament Christian.

The doctrine of Marriage starts in Genesis and goes throughout. The Apostle Paul would not contradict Jesus or the Old Testament. That is bad doctrine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
9 minutes ago, Pastorj said:

The doctrine of Marriage starts in Genesis and goes throughout. The Apostle Paul would not contradict Jesus or the Old Testament. That is bad doctrine.

This is a very good point worthy of consideration. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 hours ago, Pastorj said:

The doctrine of Marriage starts in Genesis and goes throughout. The Apostle Paul would not contradict Jesus or the Old Testament. That is bad doctrine.

I'm not sure we disagree.  However, things said by Paul contradict things said by Jesus until taken in context.  But I'll stand by my statement that if one wants to know what God's plan for marriage is in this age, it's to be found in 1 Corinthians 7.  Of course, other things related to marriage are found throughout the scriptures

 

Edited by swathdiver
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

 

On 8/30/2018 at 9:24 PM, Jordan Kurecki said:

Does “Not Under Bondage” Mean Divorce Is Permitted?

The word rendered “bondage” (1 Cor. 7:15) is the Greek term douloo, which means “to make a slave of.” Observe how the word is translated in Titus 2:3 — “enslaved to much wine.”

Biblically speaking, marriage is never viewed as slavery! The “bondage,” i.e., enslavement, does not refer to the marriage union. If the unbeliever departs, that is not the Christian’s responsibility. The brother or sister is not enslaved to maintain a togetherness (note the allusion of 1 Cor. 7:5) at the expense of fidelity to the Lord.

Interestingly, douloo (under bondage) in verse 15 is, in the Greek Testament, a perfect tense form, dedoulotai. The perfect tense denotes a present state resulting from past action. Its force here is this: “was not bound [past action] and is not bound [present state].” The sense of the verse thus is:

Yet if (assuming such should occur) the unbeliever separates himself, let him separate himself: the brother or sister was not [before the departure] and is not [now that the departure has occurred] enslaved ....

Whatever the “bondage” is, therefore, the Christian was not in it even before the disgruntled spouse left. But the saint was married (and is) to him, hence, the bondage is not the marriage!

Let the reader substitute the word “marriage” for “bondage,” giving the full force to the perfect tense (i.e., “has not been married, and is not married”) and the fallacy of viewing the bondage as the marriage itself will be apparent.

First Corinthians 7:15 does not expand upon the Savior’s teaching with reference to divorce and remarriage, as much as some wish that it were so.

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/683-what-is-the-meaning-of-not-under-bondage-1-cor-7-15

I thought this was worth re-quoting. I think it refutes the notion that 1 Cor 7 allows remarriage.

Edited by Jordan Kurecki
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
19 hours ago, Jordan Kurecki said:

 

I thought this was worth re-quoting. I think it refutes the notion that 1 Cor 7 allows remarriage.

Jordan,

Your interpretation goes contrary to Jesus, therefore is wrong. I will find some time this week to go through 1 Cor. 7. Just been busy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 minutes ago, Pastorj said:

Jordan,

Your interpretation goes contrary to Jesus, therefore is wrong. I will find some time this week to go through 1 Cor. 7. Just been busy.

Actually I think my position harmonizes with Christ, if you divorce and marry someone else you commit adultery, with the exception that you already mentioned earlier of fornication during the betrothal period. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
22 hours ago, Jordan Kurecki said:

 

I thought this was worth re-quoting. I think it refutes the notion that 1 Cor 7 allows remarriage.

Not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but that website you cited teaches the false doctrine that Christians can LOSE their salvation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 10/2/2018 at 12:33 PM, (Omega) said:

Not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but that website you cited teaches the false doctrine that Christians can LOSE their salvation.

Didn't realize that, I think they also teach baptismal regeneration it seems. However, that doesn't mean the comments on 1 Cor 7...even Catholics are right about the Deity of Christ and the Trinity. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I understand that Jordan, which is why I made the disclaimer of having no intention to prove that the author of that thesis was somehow guilty of eisegesis regarding 1 Corinthians chapter 7. But he (Wayne Jackson) is the same author who holds to the false doctrine that Christian's can lose their salvation. I would never be concerned about you not having the ability to rightly divide the word of truth. I know that you most certainly can as it is evident in your posts. Keep on truckin in your pursuit for the absolute and irrefutable truths contained in sacred scripture. I look forward to your future posts! I'm here to learn from my brethren. :)

God Bless!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
  • Members

After looking at these passages presented, I've come to this conclusion:

Marry a believer

* a getting to know or courtship period is necessary, people sometimes are unpredictable or give false information, so making sure a mate is saved is a vital aspect before tying the knot

If in a marriage with a non-believer, either:

* stay if he's acceptable and treats you nicely

* leave if he's abusive or unbearable, however stay separated but don't remarry

Now, Jordan stated that a man should accept a cheating spouse, but what man does that? I've seen how men stop loving cheating wives, it affects men more than women who are more prone to forgive cheating husbands. Still, a painful betrayal in both cases

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By ChristianUnderground
      I am new to this forum, and I specifically came here to see the IFB views about Divorce, Re-Marriage, Adultery and Ministry.  I am an IFB and have wrestled for years about this topic, because of my desire to be in the ministry.  I can say that this has been a subject of great debate since the 1st century and, knowing that God is not the author of confusion, I can only conclude that Satan has used this to divide churches and create sects that do not glorify God.  One thing is clear to me; "The husband of one wife" means what it says.  A one woman man, committed to the one he is married to, whatever the situation, be it death or divorce...BUT, I must continue!
      First of all, I would like to say that we are not under the Law in the sense that our flesh must perform all that is written or perform sacrifices to atone for the wrong we have done, but Grace did not abolish it: on the contrary, Grace fulfilled it all in Christ.  We are new creatures in Him which is a great miracle in itself.  But being a new creature does not mean that anything goes in the church.  Nothing in the Law itself gave the commandment "Thou shalt not Divorce".  Moses allowed it only because of the hardness of men's hearts.  But, the Law did say "Thou shalt not commit Adultery".  Jesus went on to teach that even if you look on a woman to lust after her, you have committed adultery with her in your heart.  Is the issue here really Divorce, or is it Adultery?  If the issue is Divorce, then I am convicted that the issue is settled.  But, if the issue is Adultery, then no man has the right to be a Pastor or Deacon under Jesus' definition of Adultery.  Now, there is no man in the ministry who would admit to this secret sin, and any man that would say that he has never committed adultery is a lier.   But, Jesus Himself linked the two together.  Adultery and Divorce go hand in hand.  Not that both the husband and wife committed it, but someone in the relationship did and Divorce was the outcome.  But the two are also separated in some cases.  The lack of Adultery is not listed as a requirement for being a Pastor or Deacon, but Divorce is.  Why?  Also, to be a Pastor or Deacon one must be blameless!  Who of you that fill the pulpit is blameless?  The answer of course is NO ONE! So, what are we to do? 
      It is unfortunate that today sex is everywhere.  The clothing that men and women wear in the secular world is unbelievable, to say the least.  We would have to wear blindfolds to keep from looking a second time.  So, I believe that for this debate, everything must be simplified because I believe Jesus made it simple.  Divorce is Adultery. You just can't get around it.  I have tried, and the conviction of the Holy Spirit will not allow it!  ANYONE who Divorces his wife SAVE FOR THE CAUSE OF FORNICATION, causes her to commit adultery (Matt 5:32, Matt 19:9).  Now, we can slice it, dice it, filet it, and beat it to death, but, Divorce is Divorce, and if you have divorced, there is NO scripture that will support a man being a Pastor or Deacon.  I have tried to get around it, but have always been convicted to the contrary.  I believe the following to be the reason.
      First of all, there are still those men that are available for ministry that God has CALLED to be Pastors and Deacons, (although this too is waning in this present evil world).  Men who are married to their first and only wife.  The reason for this requirement is first, for those exact men, and second, because of the world.  If we do begin to fill the offices of Pastors and Deacons with Divorced men, then it will erode marriage (more and more Pastors or their wives will be tempted to Divorce), it will diminish the offices, and it will bring controversy and contempt from the World.  Remember; Rom 14:21  "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."  Therefor, I will not allow myself to do a great disservice to the church or the Kingdom of Heaven by allowing myself to be ordained as a Pastor of Deacon.  Can I still preach?  Yes.  Can I still serve in the mission field? Yes.  I can do any other thing but fill these offices FORMALLY. I have been disqualified.  Also, I believe that those in these offices have a responsibility to not, through action or inaction, create an environment that seemingly makes Divorce an unpardonable sin. Use those whom God has given to you to use the gifts the Spirit of God has given them.  Don't be guilty of quenching the Holy Spirit in someone's life. 
      I also must remind the reader that if men were to regard the requirements of 1 Tim 3:2,12, and Tit 1.6, then I fear there would be no Pastors or Deacons.  So, the argument could be made that our standards have become relaxed in filling these offices.
      So, I exhort everyone that reads this to do the Word, preach the Word, quench not the Spirit, love the brethren, don't do anything that will cause a Brother or Sister to stumble and above all else, love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your spirit.  AMEN
    • By Roselove
      When Jesus says the only way you can divorce your wife and it be permitted, is if she commits fornication (either before or during betrothal, I suppose), is it a situation where the woman would be married to the person she had relations with, in God’s eyes (relations=marriage?) or was it not something that had to be done, but would be permissible for other reasons? 
      Basically, what if the woman was truly repentant of her past actions and truly loved and wanted to be a good wife to the man. Would the man have to not be with her, to be in God’s will, because by God’s law, it would be forbidden, or is it something you can choose to do, if you decide that you can’t trust her or it was shameful in appearance or something? 
      Also, is a marriage only legitimate if one of them is saved? I think I’ve heard that, but wanted clarification. 
      I hope my question makes sense! 
      Thank you
       
    • By That Guy
      Hello, I'm new here. Literally 10 minutes new. I'll just jump right into the reason I signed up, and decided to post. I'm hoping there's hope for guys like me. I got married before I was saved, and divorced before I was saved, and that was 17 or 18 years ago. I'm older, but by no means old (40), and have a lot of life left in me if The Lord permits me to live a long life, or doesn't come back first. Everything I've seen says I cannot remarry, and since my original wife was unsaved, and is now remarried there's no hope of reconcilliation.
       
      Some Christians do go on to marry again regardless, but it doesn't look like that's something that God's going to permit. Feeling pretty hopeless about life. What's a guy to do? Any thoughts? Did I just mess up, and that's the end of that?
    • By Nick S
      Hi there, 
       
      I've actually been raised a Southern Baptist but I hope you don't mind me posting here. 
       
      I've just found out that my parents might be getting a divorce, my father doesn't abuse my mother and hasn't cheated on her, though he has shown physical violence toward other members of my family. 
       
      I have no idea what to think - My dad is away on business and I don't even know if he's coming home again or not. If you could please send your prayers to my mom and dad I would really appreciate it, that they might find a way to reconcile their differences and work together to fix their marriage.
       
      I'm so confused and don't know what to think about any of this. Sorry for the rambling. 
       
      Many thanks, and God bless,
       
      Nick x
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 31 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...