Does God ever permit divorce?

Hope of Glory; I am asking yours.

sifc;
That is a way to get around it for sure, just wonder if it is the right way. I really would love to have a clear cut answer but have wrestled with this for 33 years and would love it if someone had an answer using the Scriptures and not just emotions. John the Baptist told the King that he had his brother's wife.

 

Yes, John the Baptist was preaching to an unrepentant sinner who had not confessed his sin and repented of it. John's message was "REPENT!" What do you do when they confess and repent?

 

Yes, but there is a world of difference between preaching contrary to the Word of God and preaching contrary to your interpretation of the Word of God. It is not a clear-cut case of going directly against the Word of God; it is a matter of disagreeing with your own particular interpretation of the Word. If you know anything at all about the divorce question and have studied this issue, you would know there has been ongoing debate extending back into antiquity (e.g. Hillel and Shammai). Even today, good Bible-believing men are divided over this issue. Real truth-seekers approach this matter with much humility and solemnity. On both sides of the debate, only the know-it-alls, who really know very little, rigidly pontificate their dogmatic biases. It is a hard thing to know, apply and rightly divide the Word in this matter. Anyone saying otherwise knows nothing.

BTW, do you really know Mr. Sanderson’s explanation of the Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 passages? He explains it in his sermon. Have you listened to it? Although I do not necessarily agree, I must allow him his opinion (I do hold that Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 are addressing different aspects of divorce). Can you expound Mr. Sanderson’s position on these passages? What is your position? You have never cogently stated your view. Why don’t you put your erudite analysis on display for public scrutiny and let us poke holes in it?
</font>[/QUOTE]It is not my interpretation. It is the clear Word of God. </font>[/QUOTE]I have raised numerous objections as to why this is not clear and you have not answer a single one.

Read my post on the probable play upon the idea of the wife already being an adulteress. Also, it is in reference to Deuteronomy 24:1.

Also, read my post explaining the questions concerning the meaning of πορνεια. Answer my questions and I can take what you say seriously. Otherwise it is just yea, yea, yea ………………

No, it is not clear or we would have a consensus among Bible-believing Christians. What do you mean that Jesus permits divorce? Does he endorse it? Allow it to happen against God’s will? Tolerates it? Define your words.

What does Mr. Sanderson mean by permit? Does it mean allow? Tolerate? Put up with? Endorse? Condone? Define what he means before you say he is wrong. Have you listened to his sermon?

No, this is false. You have not adequately established what the clear teaching is because you have not answered the questions and dealt with the issues. This is only one man’s opinion without supporting Biblical exegesis.

No, I’m trying to accurately articulate a Biblical argument for a balanced Scriptural view of the divorce and remarriage questions. These words are my daily working vocabulary and I am not trying to impress anyone. I use this vocabulary daily among my friends and colleagues as we discuss ideas. I don’t even think of them as big words. In fact, I have avoided technical jargon. Am I to be criticized and blamed for a good vocabulary? You do seem a little touchy on this point. Perhaps you do realize that you are out over your head. If you don’t understand a word, get out your dictionary.

I try to use words accurately and precisely. Perhaps you would do better to pay closer attention to words such as how Mr. Sanderson uses the word permit. What does it mean?

The problem is not my vocabulary—it’s your lack of argumentation and answers for my questions. So far, you have only parroted the same shibboleth over and over—it ain’t working either. You have established no clear teaching of the Word of God on this subject and you have not shown that Mr. Sanderson is calling the Word a lie.

BTW, since you have not answered or even attempted to answer any of the questions that I raised, am I to assume that you have no answers?

Sir, I intend no disrespect or ridicule toward you but I cannot buy your dogmatic assertations any more than I can accept Mr. Sanderson's. You and Sanderson are two peas in a pod. This is a hard question and it must be approached humbly and carefully from both sides.

 

If Jesus did not permit divorces, divorces would not occur at all.

 

What do you mean by permit?

 

Paidagogos;
My last question on the matter reluctantly. If the King had of repented and confessed his sin could he of kept his brother's wife?

 

There is no consummation. This is bad Roman Catholic theology. Where do you find the consummation of marriage as the sex act in Scriptures? The man and woman are husband and wife as soon as the covenant is made.

I will take the position that there are two separate issues here—divorce and remarriage. Divorce of itself, except as perhaps permitted by Scripture, is sin because it is covenant-breaking. Covenant-breaking is sin. Divorce, like the marriage covenant, is not necessarily tied to any sex act. So, we will not discuss divorce with respect to the question posed.

The question specifically deals with remarriage and adultery, which is connected to sex. In both of the aforementioned verses, μοιχαται is the word used for adultery except for its infinitive form μοιχασθαι, which means to cause to commit adultery. The verb μοιχαται is of the present middle or passive deponent indicative. The present tense in the indicative indicates the present time. The middle voice is the subject acting in a way that involves the subject. I can see no indication of a continuing state of perpetual adultery. However, it follows that once one has committed adultery or any other sin, he or she is under the judgment of God until the sin is confessed, the individual repents and forgiveness is extended.

What do you think?

 

do you not know what permit means?

 

Well, she obviously could not return to Phillip (See Deuteronomy 24:3-4). Yes, he would be obligated to keep her and fulfill his covenant with her. The enigma is David and Michal in I Samuel 17:25, 18:17-19:17, 25:44, 3:13-14. This appears to be a violation of Deuteronomy 24:3-4. I don't know. What do you do on the missionary field when you lead a Muslim, who has six wives, to Christ? The wives and children in a Muslim country have no way of living without the breadwinner.

 

Do you not know that it is open to multiple interpretations? No, I don't know what you or Mr. Sanderson mean by permit. Why don't you tell me and elaborate?

 

The word permit means to allow, whether by written, express, or silent consent.

The fact that Jesus said in Matthew 19 that

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.

shows that divorce and remarriage is permitted in the case of fornication.

Also, as I said, if God did not permit divorce, it would never take place.

 

I suppose she could return to Phillip and confess and repent according to that so I will continue on searching and praying that God leads me in every situation that presents itself. Here we only know in part but there we shall know for sure. Good discussion but honestly I still am not sure, ok.

Also, God does give us a right to put away our companion and marry another if they committ fornication/adultery.

 

it is not a right, true. But it is permitted. Not His will.

 

sfiC;
I think He did give us a right. I don't think He is for divorce but still when He said "saving" the cause of fornication then I think He said for that one cause it was acceptable to Him.

 

agreed, but not for other reasons

 

Jer 3:14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you:

1Ch 5:25 And they transgressed against the God of their fathers, and went a whoring after the gods

Jer 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Fornication/Adultery can be either "physical or Spiritual".


Mt 19:3 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?

Mt 19:8 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.

Man can divorce only for the same reasons God had to divorce Israel, and it's the reason God gave man the right to divorce, but divorce from the beginning wasn't predestined, or not so.

And much like a man dating another woman in front of his ex to make her jealous, so does God.

De 32:21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people;

Ro 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

The law, in binding the wife also bounded the husband, to the other until death, God can't die, so the "wife" (Israel) must die, then they can be married to "ANOTHER".

Ro 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.

And as part of their "chastisement" for rejecting Jesus, they will "literally" become "dead" to be married to Jesus.

Re 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

Re 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:

 

Me4Him;
Very good I only would phrase one thing different and that is they were married to the Law of which they become dead to and set them free to be married to Christ.

 

By the same reasoning, God permitted polygamy in the OT. You could extend it further to say that He permits homosexuality or it would never take place. Methinks your logic is too loose and your definitions sloppy. I cannot agree with your statements and definitions.

I will stipulate:
1. God does not prevent divorce by the exercise of His divine power.
2. God does not desire divorce and it was not part of His original intent and purpose (cf. Matthew 19:9).
3. Divorce and remarriage is adultery in most cases except possibly for adultery, abandonment by an unbeliever or severe physical abuse endangering health and safety. Considering divorce and remarriage as separate actions and separate issues, the Biblical case for divorce in the aforementioned circumstances is stronger than can be made for remarriage. Scripture does not clearly or specifically address the remarriage issue except perhaps in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. One is hard pressed to ever justify divorce between believers. The Biblical outcome is repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation. If one of the supposedly believing parties refuses, then church discipline is in order and the guilty person may be declared and treated as a heathen and unbeliever for their refusal to repent. If divorce occurs afterwards, the offending party is treated as an unbeliever (Matthew 18:17).
4. Most divorces today, even among Christians, are definitely un-Biblical and sinful. The resulting remarriage is adultery.
5. Even in the case of sexual infidelity (i.e. adultery), divorce is not commanded and the believer should exercise forgiveness upon repentance and seek reconciliation (cf. 1 Corinthians 7:10-11).

Allow me to toss out another angle. What did Jesus mean in Matthew 19:8 when He spoke of the hardness of heart (σκληροκαρδιαν)? Many take this to mean the hardness of heart in wanting a divorce. Could it mean the hardness of heart in Israel’s refusing to exercise the death penalty for adultery (Leviticus 209:10)? I am certain that this would have pretty much curtailed the adultery and divorce business. In a modern setting, is our dilemma the lack of church discipline that exacerbates the divorce problem in the church? What do you think?

 

Now I can pretty well agree with this statement. However, I believe that the Christian should forgive and reconcile if the offending party confesses and repents.

Does divorce carry with it the right to remarriage?

 

according to Jesus in Matthew 5 and 19 it does if fornication is involved

Fornication breaks the marriage contract.