Divorce and Remarriage

[Headcoveredlady]

Originally posted by hrhema:


So don't sit and say people need to learn to forgive. You don't know what a person has forgiven or not. You can come up with all kinds of scenarios to prove your point but Jesus explicitly said if a person divorces and remarries EXCEPT FOR FORNICATION, then adultery happens.

Hrhema,
Can you share the Scripture that says except for fornication you can remarry? I am aware of the Scripture that says you are free to be divorced and not bound but I have not seen the verse that says remarriage is not adultery.

HCL

 

[Daniel David]

HCL, it doesn't exist.

hrhema has either unintentionally misread the verses or intentionally twisted it. I would like to believe the former.

Matthew 5:31-32
Furthermore it has been said, Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce. But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

Matthew 19:9
And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.

The only time Jesus mentions remarriage is to call it adultery.

 

[Wisdom Seeker]

Originally posted by PreachtheWord:
Wisdomseeker, I will post more later, but the Scripture NEVER mentions the "innocent" party. Have you wondered why?
Do you know that a cathoic invented the idea because of the sacramental view they believe in regards to marriage?

Originally posted by WisdomSeeker:
What do either of these comments have to do with the topic....and why did you address them to me?

Originally posted by PreachtheWord:
Do you believe in an "innocent" party?

Do you even know why you said these things? Why is it so hard to answer a question...you said these things..surely you know why you said them.

I find it very frustrating that instead of just telling me what you mean, and what your intent was in attaching my name to your post...you keep averting the question by asking yet another question.

So I ask again... Please explain what you meant about both comments...as in:

I asked you if you ever wondered why the scriptures never mention an innocent party because....
My intent in posting this particular question to you was...

I asked you "Do you know that a catholic invented the idea because of the sacramental view they believe in regards to marriage?" because....
My intent in posting this particular question to you was...

I hope that made it easier for you to answer me. If you find this as frustrating as I do, then I hope you will, in the future either post what you mean to say to me in a way that is less cryptic/more explicit...or leave my name off of your comments all together. Thank you.

P.S....It's okay to say that you don't know why you said these things.

[ December 06, 2002, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: WisdomSeeker ]

 

[Sherrie]

hrhema.....This is where he cannot answer you because he does not have the experience to answer you. He has to be in toal control of the issue and justify his control.

Experiences in life can help you to see things a whole different way. And then we are able to go out and share with others. We are able to find refuge in God. And at the very same time he strokes are face in confort, he gives us the knowledge we need to help others, or even learn from our mistakes. God touches each of our hearts different.

But one thing is for certain...He gave us all Jesus.

Also One thing for sure is this young Pastor, or New Pastor has not learned yet is compassion. You can have all the rules in the book and you can try and always walk down that straight path never verying right or left. But you will never do it without compassion and forgiveness.

Jesus walked through the wheat fields on the sabbath, saved souls on the sabbath, sat with drunks and tax collectors. Forgave Martha. David ate the showbread even after he lied.

Forgiveness is the biggest thing we need to remember. And we cannot judge another persons relationship with God. We do not have that right.

When breaking one commandment we break them all. When our children lie we correct them. We teach them you do not do this. But we also forgive them.

Adultry can also be when we are not following God. Not being saved. But once we come to know the Lord, we run toward Him. He does not deny us. He gives us a new body. We become alive. We are no longer held by our sins once we take our sins to Jesus. We are new.

hrhema...You can not let this guy get under your skin.

{{HUGS!}}}

Sherrie

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by Sherrie:
hrhema...You can not let this guy get under your skin.

I have tried to be levelheaded and present Scripture along with my interpretation. I have also tried to honestly and Scripturally answer every question.

I have no desire to get under someone's skin.

As long as you and others judge the Scripture according to your experience, this discussion is over.

You have an experience, along with everyone else. The only authoritative standard is the Word of God.

As soon as your experience is brought up, I could give you plenty of experiences where the woman left her abusive situation and remarried a guy thinking he was great. Well, until she found out 10 years later that he had molested her children. Should we all factor those experiences into this already sensitive issue?

I know both good and bad situations that have resulted in divorce and remarriage. That is a credit to God's mercy.

I still have yet to see one person answer any of the interpretations I gave to the words of Christ.

Don't say you embrace the authority of Scripture as long as you read it through your experience. Experience is your authority.

 

[Daniel David]

WisdomSeeker:

1. I mentioned the "innocent" party because I saw you use the term.

2. I mentioned that a catholic invented the term because of the sacramental view they force upon salvation and grace.

So, I saw you used the term. Then, I sought to give you a brief history of the term.

 

[hrhema]

I cannot believe that Preach the Word will write the scripture and ignore what it says. There are five other translations that say exactly what I say. Here is one of them: "And I tell you this, a man who divorce his wife and marries another commits adultery-unless his wife has been unfaithful. " This is a translation from Tyndale.

Even the Amplified version makes it clear. This is exactly what the King James Version says but it just is worded a little different.

Jesus was dealing with this issue because of all the reasons the Jews used to divorce. He was making it very clear that to God the only reason to divorce and remarry is adultery. Adultery destroys the bonds of marriage. Adultery removes the marriage in Gods sight. When a person commits adultery in God's sightit was as if they were never married.

 

[Daniel David]

That is interesting, hrhema, but it doesn't square with the same thing found in Matthew 19. Jesus did not say adultery, he said sexual immorality. The laws against sexual immorality are found in Leviticus 18. Also, divorce was granted due to the hard hearts of people.

Stop building up your interpretation by ignoring everything else.

If you have embraced the grace and forgiveness of the Lord, you are indeed forgiven. I do not call you an adulterer.

Since the Scripture is not the authority or the reason for the discussion, I am probably done here.

Have a nice day.

 

[Siegfried]

I realize I'm jumping into this very late, but I want to make a couple observations. I've skimmed most of the discussion, but it's possible I've missed something.

First, there has been little if any discussion of church discipline. I cannot imagine that a divorce could be justified if proper church discipline has not taken place.

Second, I haven't observed much interaction with PTW's arguments against divorce. Plenty of people have popped of with their pet passages, but seldom has anyone displayed any real consideration of the difficulties in the issues.

Third, emotionalism is running rampant. Arguments along the line of "God is blessing my new marriage" do not carry the weight of biblical authority. PTW is actually far less emotional than many of those accusing him of the same.

For the record, I disagree with Preach on this issue.

 

[hrhema]

I am not surprised that a person runs when they do damage to others. I am not surprised that they claim everyone is dealing with emotions and not scripture when everyone who has posted has dealt with the scriptures but because the majority does not agree with one person interpretation then that person resorts to running.

How many times have I not responded to your claims Preach the Word but you duck them. I just sent you scripture proving my point and you cry emotionalism. Everyone has dealt with scripture and correct interpretation. We all know no one will convince you and that is fine but everyone knows now how hard and harsh you are.

 

[Daniel David]

Let us see here.

I have posted references to the following Scriptures:

Gen. 2:24
Leviticus 18
Deut. 24
Matthew 5
Matthew 19
Luke 16:18
1 Cor. 7

What I have seen references made to:

Matthew 5
1 Cor. 7

Now, I have tried to respond honestly without labeling anyone else.

hrhema, if you consider it to be hard and harsh because I keep referring to the Scripture and believe it to be authoritative, fine. So be it. I cannot convince you. The Holy Spirit will have to.

As someone else who is new to the discussion has already pointed out, no substantial interacting is going on and people's experiences are winning out. Since that is the case, I don't see how it would be productive to continue.

hrhema, you should never use the Scripture to justify a position. I believe that you have.

I also have 4 centuries of Christian writing affirming my beliefs. You, you have embraced a position that was invented by a Catholic because of sacramental purposes seen in marriage. If I am so bizarre, just write me off. Please, stop with the constant - O.J. killed Nicole lines and pharisee lines and hard hearted lines and such. If this is the best you can do, there is no more need to post on this issue with you. I hardly consider myself running. I have posted more than anyone on this thread. Try to have an intelligent discussion.

 

[Johnv]

Mormons believe you're only sealed in Heaven to your first spouse. Some of these posts have that same odor.

 

[hrhema]

I did address Matthew 19 and even gave a version of the Bibles interpretation for it. Genesis 2:24 does not address divorce. Leviticus 18 deal with forbidden sexual relations. What has this to do with divorce. I also did respond to the scripture in I Corinthians.

If remarriage was forbidden by God then why does LEviticus say The priest must not marry women defiled by prostitution or women who have been divorced. If remarriage was forbidden then this scripture should never have been written in the first place or repeated further into the chapter. The reason was they were to be Holy and were to marry women who were virgins. They were even forbidden to marry widows. Why? The womans husband is dead. It is because she had intercourse with a man. Yes it was her husband but all priests could marry only virgins.

Lets look at Numbers 5:30> THE HUSBAND WILL BE INNOCENT OF ANY GUILT IN THIS MATTER BUT HIS WIFE WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR HER SIN.

I REST MY CASE! You wanted scripture about the innocent party. You have it.

 

[Wisdom Seeker]

Originally posted by PreachtheWord:
WisdomSeeker:

1. I mentioned the "innocent" party because I saw you use the term.

I said I agreed with what Helen posted. God doesn't punish the innocent. I am innocent of adultery... Your implications that there is no such thing as an innocent party implies that by my actions my husband reacted by committing this sin...therefore I am also guilty of his sin. Actually the Bible sites instances where the adulterer was punished...but not the one who did not commit this sin...so your theory is obviously incorrect.

2. I mentioned that a catholic invented the term because of the sacramental view they force upon salvation and grace.

So, I saw you used the term. Then, I sought to give you a brief history of the term.

Actually I didn't use this term, it was someone else. I don't even know what you mean by "term". The fact that you are reiterating that this comment was made to me...just shows me that you didn't go back to re-read the posts before answering me here. You answered without taking my question seriously enough to even check.

But I grow weary... so many words... so few answers. The beginning of knowledge is the admittance that you don't know everything. The Bible is not meant to be completely understood...it takes a lifetime of study...and even then...only Heaven will reveal all it's mysteries.

It's okay to say you don't know. It would be far better than to answer without thought as you did.

[ December 06, 2002, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: WisdomSeeker ]

 

[SueLyn]

I was raised to see this issue the same way Preacher sees it. But, counseling, time and a lot of situations, showed me differently. I stayed in my first marriage for 10 years, it doesn't seem that long, not even to me. My first husband committed his first act of adultery on our wedding night, and in all honesty, I have no idea how many followed, and I don't believe he does either. It doesn't bother me one little bit how others judge me because of my first failed marriage, it only matters to how God judges me, so...I have peace.

But so far, I really, really like SheEagle's suggestions! I mean, if people are going to keep putting us under the LAW, then let's follow it to the letter! In your best British accent, "oh, boy...there's going to be a stoning!".

I'm just kidding, okay? It's a joke, joke, joke!
Okay, I'll leave now...
Sue

 

[JCLWRB]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
I am leaving this discussion. I will have no part in giving you a reason to keep encouraging women to be beaten.

maybe ptw should be the one to leave this discussion if he is going to encourage beating of women.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by hrhema:
Lets look at Numbers 5:30> THE HUSBAND WILL BE INNOCENT OF ANY GUILT IN THIS MATTER BUT HIS WIFE WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR HER SIN.

I REST MY CASE! You wanted scripture about the innocent party. You have it.

I already mentioned that according to Jesus, divorce was granted as a concession to those under Moses' Law because of their hard hearts.

Btw, props to you for appealing to the Law to justify your position. Should all Christians appeal to the Law for whatever reason they want to also?

So, according to Jesus, I could understand your position as the following:

It is okay for people to have a hard heart.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by WisdomSeeker:
It's okay to say you don't know. It would be far better than to answer without thought as you did.

Wisdomseeker, I honestly don't know what you want me to say. There is a breakdown somewhere. I am not trying to avoid you.

If you mean "innocent" because you did not commit adultery, fine. I never meant to imply you did something that caused your husband to react and then go cheat.

On a serious note, would you say you were a perfect wife 100% of the time?

If yes, then good for you, you are the only spouse ever.

If no, then there is no such thing as an innocent party (which is my point).

 

[Sherrie]

"You are a mean one Mr. Grinch!"

There is no need for rudenss!

Sherrie

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by SueLyn:
I mean, if people are going to keep putting us under the LAW, then let's follow it to the letter!

I am not the one who is putting anyone under the Law. Those who are advocating divorce and remarriage are. Are you not paying attention to the discussion here?

Jesus said it was allowed because of hard hearts for those who lived according to Moses' Law.

Good grief .