1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Divorce and Remarriage: the real issue.

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by pinoybaptist, Aug 4, 2006.

  1. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    13,420
    Likes Received:
    1,770
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The purpose of Church discipline is to restore the fellowship of the wayward member. Part of membership is (or should be) the partaking of the Lord's Supper with like-minded believers. To deny membership to a repentent former member would be to deny them the opportunity to obey their Lord by participating in the Lord's Supper.

    I understand your desire to keep the church from the world. With respect to you and your position here (and I do respect your understanding of this particular scripture), I think you are taking it too far. If a person is repentent before God and the church, we must exhibit the perfect patience of Christ and welcome them home.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  2. MadFingerPainter

    MadFingerPainter New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    So I have to wait until my ex...who had an affair...dies before I can remarry and be alright in the eyes of God?
     
  3. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    2
    NO! Please ready my post on page two of this thread.
     
  4. MadFingerPainter

    MadFingerPainter New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you for this.
     
  5. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    Okay, this much I follow, and I agree with you 100% that these people still need to be rebuked, and probably not allowed back as members of the church. Why? Because at this particular point they are still trying to justify what they did was permissible.

    What I'm saying - and maybe this is our sticking point, or maybe you agree and I don't know it - is that if these people repent of what they did, they should be welcomed back into fellowship (and membership).

    Suppose the woman (just as an example) honestly says, "I never should have divorced my husband. It was wrong. I made all the wrong decisions for the wrong reasons and I have damaged many lives as a result, including my own. I can't undo all of the damage now, and I cannot justify what I did in any way. I beg God's forgiveness and yours." I think in that case you should bring her back into fellowship (and membership, of course). Then, there is the problem of her new husband's repentance. If he repents also, he should be brought back in.

    If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. That doesn't say He make a way to undo the damage of our sins, and sometimes that's simply impossible. But He forgives us, and cleanses us. That is enough to bring someone back into fellowship.
     
  6. J. Jump

    J. Jump New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2004
    Messages:
    4,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's what Scripture says. Nowhere that I can find does God dissolve a marriage by any other means other than death. Punishment for adultery in the OT was much harsher as Helen pointed out, so it wasn't much of an issue, but seeings that adulterers are not put to death then one must reconcile with their spouse or remain separated and single as far as I can tell in Scripture.

    The Matthew 5 passage is speaking of the Jewish engagement period, where a divorcement was allowed during the betrothal period for acts of fornication, but after the actual marriage it is until death parts us.
     
  7. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    That's not what scripture says. The only place it comes close to saying this is in Romans, and Paul is quoting a law (for the sake of those who were familiar with the law) to illustrate that death releases us from bondage. His illustration was that we are dead to the law and alive to Christ. That alone should tell you that he wasn't teaching that we should continue to obey the law he was using as part of his illustration.
     
  8. pasdave

    pasdave New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2006
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    In Matthew 5:32 Jesus gives us just grounds for divorce. But, Jesus never said that one must divorce an adultrous spouse.

    Instead, scripture gives an example of forgiveness if the offender is repentant-John 8:1-11.

    I believe, even in the case of fornication, that, as Christians, if something arises in marriage we should not be the one to start the divorce proceedings. In the case of both the husband and the wife are Christians, neither should be the instigator, therefore forgiveness and restoration are the only alernatives.
     
  9. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seems to me that Helen's case fits Matt:, because her husband comitted fornication against her. Her testimony does not give all cases the right to marry again unless I am misreading what Helen wrote. I see Helen told Madfingerpainter it was ok for her to marry again so maybe Helen knows her case. I didn't see where she posted it. Sorry, I missed the part where he had an affair Madfingerpainter so if that is so according to the words of Jesus you would be free. At least that is the way our church works, and that is the way I work when it comes to baptizing someone.

    I would say that every case stands on its own merit. The ground is polluted but if a person wants to stay married it probably is better. Jesus just gave a reason if a person wanted to put their spouse away.
     
    #29 Brother Bob, Aug 4, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 4, 2006
  10. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Hey, don't look at me. I'm not the one who wrote the Scriptures. I just follow it.:flower:
     
  11. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You said it yourself, "like-minded believers". There is no like-mindedness if after having been informed of what Scriptures say, the member still chooses adultery and divorce. That being the case, how can two walk together except they be agreed ?

    I did not write the rules. God did.

    But how far is far when the Word of God is concerned ? There is nothing in the Scriptures that give us the right to stretch God's word to accomodate error.
    You all of you assumed that the person is repentant. I have been saying all along that they chose evil over good, and I did not define which is evil and which is good here, God did.

    A member who had commited murder may not be subjected to church discipline, I venture to say, since murder is far different from adulterous remarriages.

    While the repentant murderer cannot bring back his victim to life, his repentance before God should be enough for his sin, if it is truly Godly sorrow that he has. Further, he can face the family of his victim and own up to his responsibility.

    Not the case in remarriage after divorce.
    First off, the Scriptures indicate that as far as God is concerned, the marriage stands while both spouses are alive, though man dissolves the marriage, and if you and I are both believers, I suppose we agree that the laws of our God is excellently higher than that of mere men.

    Secondly, when one remarries, then before God this one has become an adulterer since he joined his/her flesh with another.

    And then remember that repentance oftentimes involves restitution, else there is no turning away that has been done.

    What restitution can a repentant adulterer offer ? Divorce again so he/she can go back to the former ?

    I don't know how to say it, but I have a feeling doing that just compounds the error.
     
  12. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thank you for your constructive contribution to the discussions, sir.
    Your points are well taken.
     
  13. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2

    Very odd analysis indeed, that murder, the taking of a human life, is a forgiveable sin or less sin than divorce and remarriage. I suppose that includes abortion. As far as your quote about the marriage being intact in the eyes of God until one of the spouses is dead, that is your opinion, not Scripture.
     
    #33 saturneptune, Aug 4, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 4, 2006
  14. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    I realize we are fallen and sin. But divorce involves more than the married couple; it involves children (if there are any) and the families of the couple. Children are incredibly wounded by divorce.

    I guess I would say, where is the repenting? If someone truly repents their divorce and they have not remarried, then I would think they would not remarry if the divorced spouse is still alive and has not remarried, because a truly repentant divorcee would want reconciliation and would pray for that. But I don't see that happening much.
     
  15. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thank you, saturneptune, now we're getting somewhere. I hate quarelling with anybody, so let me take this opportunity to apologize for the words I have spoken to you.

    The consequence of that is that I slept late thinking of what I've said to you. Forgive this hothead.

    Now, back to your question.

    The easy way to answer that is: because God said so.

    However, considering the way Scripture was written, or maybe translated, or both, I realize that answer will be unfair and simply not enough.

    We need to go to Scripture, and though I tried to explain this in another post in this thread, you being somebody I apologized to behooves me to explain again what I understand the Scriptures are saying.

    In Matthew 19 is recorded an attempt by the legalists among the Judaists to trap the Savior with a trick question. You can read about the question in verse 3. Now, the Savior is Jehovah God, and being Jehovah God, he knew what Moses did. He also knows that in all the laws of Israel, Moses allowed divorce only in the cause of fornication. Bear in mind, it was Moses, not Jehovah, who allowed divorce.

    As far as God was concerned, from the beginning He intended marriage between a man and a woman to be permanent, and Jesus explained that in His answer. From the beginning, He said, it was not so. Here we have the unchanging, immutable God in the flesh stating that marriage was never intended to be dissolved by any man.

    Therefore, although Moses allowed a bill of divorcement for reason of fornication, as far as God is concerned, that marriage which the laws and procedures of man dissolved, still is binding before Him, the source of all laws, and that being the case, the man who divorces his wife for any reason (that was the trick question of the Judaists) save for the cause of fornication (that was the only exclusion that Jewish laws have and He is subtly telling them He knows the law) is causing that wife he put away to commit adultery because if someone marries her then he who marries her, and she, are both guilty of adultery.

    Was Jesus endorsing divorce because of fornication ?

    I do not believe so, because that will run contrary to His own statement that what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.

    And then there is the apostle Paul, who both in Romans and in his first letter to the Corinthians unmistakably state that the only time a marriage is dissolved, and remarriage is not a sin, is when one of the spouses is dead.

    I realize this is a hard stance that I am taking and may be offensive to many, but again, the Scriptures are the Scriptures, and as God says, His ways are not our ways, and His thoughts are not our thoughts.
     
  16. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, no, murder is murder and sin is sin. But like I said, the murderer besides dealing with his sin before God and receiving forgiveness if truly repentant has no one else to answer to if he also had been punished by man's laws.
    Now, the kin of those he victimized may plot to kill him but that is a consequence of his sin if it happens, and if he is truly a Christian it really doesn't matter if he dies since death is but the beginning of true life.
    There is no law, divine or man made, that he will break again as he tries to reconcile with those he has wronged.
    Not the case with the divorcee, though.
    He/she may be repentant, but, how is he/she going to show that repentance and render restitution ?
    By divorcing again ? Like I said, deep in my bones something tells me that just compounds the sin.
     
  17. MorganT

    MorganT New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    0

    Im not arguing with you but for conversation sake you say that nothing is new under the sun like the bilbe says what about in the Old Testament were they have more than one wife like
    Gen 4:19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
    Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
    Not a wife but wives
    Gen 31:17 Then Jacob rose up, and set his sons and his wives upon camels;
    2Sa 5:13 And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David.
    1Ki 11:3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.

    I see you can just keep adding wives however you just never divorce one and it all makes sense.
     
  18. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    WoW! I didn't know all of this where we could just keep adding wives. Wait until I tell my wife of 45 years. :)
     
  19. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    13,420
    Likes Received:
    1,770
    Faith:
    Baptist
    PinoyBaptist

    I believe "marriage" occurs whenever a man has relations with a woman. There was no "ceremony" in the church when Adam took Eve for his wife. They had relations, they were married. Therefore, if a person has relations before he is "married" in the church, he is an adulterer if he "marries" anyone else but that woman.

    One man, one woman, joined together for life. That is the model. That is what God ordained. The two have never had sexual intercourse with anyone else, and never will as long as they both shall live. Should one die, the other may remarry either to someone who had never had sexual intercourse, or to someone who had also been a faithful spouse and had become a widow(er). This is the bilbical standard for marriage.

    This is supported, I believe, by Gen. 2, and Jesus' comment to the woman at the well (John 4) and Paul's discussion of joining with a harlot (I Cor 6).

    How many Christians can meet this biblical standard? Very few, if any.

    There must be a place for forgiveness. There must be a place for God separating us from our sins as far as the east is from the west. There must be a place for newness of life. There must be a place for "from this point forward, I will obey my God", and then strive with every once of strength to make it so.

    Of course God would rather have people demonstrate a commitment to His ordained plan for marriage from the very beginning. But we are all sinners. God meets us where we are. He has saved us and forgiven us.

    Jesus gave us specific instructions for restoring fellowship to repentent believers. I don't believe He made an exception for those who divorce and remarry. If you can show me where Jesus or anyone else said, "never fellowship with someone who divorces and remarries, even if they are repentent before God and the Church", then I will change my mind.

    If I am in error, then I will error on the side of Grace, Mercy, and Forgiveness.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  20. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thank you, Helen.

    I do not sit in judgment and pronounce which is unforgivable or which is not.
    Mine is simply to quote Scripture as it is written, and to explain what I, in good conscience, understands it to be saying.
    I am sorry that you had such a wimp of an ex-husband.
    There is a verse in Scripture, 1 Corinthians 7:15, in which Paul seems to be saying that if an unbelieving spouse departs, the believing brother or sister is not in bondage in such cases.
    Many commentators say that this not being in bondage means the marriage bond, and for now I agree with them on that because what it amounts to is not only a desecration of the marriage bed but a total turning away from the duties and responsibilites of marriage.


    Gill puts it best, I think, when he commented:
    Here is that verse (verse 15) in context:

    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 F19 knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

    That is Paul's opinion, and just as Moses bent God's rule on marriage to accomodate the Jews, he could be wrong, and is careful to qualify his statement, "but to rest speak I, not the Lord".
     
    #40 pinoybaptist, Aug 4, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 4, 2006
Loading...