Divorce and Remarriage

Pinoy,

Your reasoning is filled and corrupted with the classic error of confusing civil crime and punishment with sin, repentance and forgiveness. Tozer makes this same error when he compares divorce to a criminal who repents while he's in jail. Society doesn't let him out of jail just because he repents and becomes a Christian, does it? He's still guilty and has to serve his time. That's why (he reasons) he may not remarry. He is not allowed out of God's jail just because he repents.

This is fallacious reasoning, however. I could use this same fallacious reasoning to justify divorce. When the court says I'm divorced, then it has freed me to remarry. I've been "let out of jail", so to speak. So why does the church still punish me by telling me I may not remarry after the court has decreed that I'm free to do so? See the problem with mixing civil justice with God's righteousness and mercy?

That's why I might be afraid to leave my children with a convicted pedophile in the church. The fact that he served his time doesn't make me confident enough. Whether I leave my children with him or not depends on whether or not I'm convinced he has truly repented, or is just giving repentence lip service. It has nothing to do with whether he served his time. But if I'm convinced he has truly repented and he asks forgiveness, then I MUST forgive him.

As it stands, it sounds like you and your church are not forgiving the sins of those who have divorced and remarried, even if they have repented of what they've done. You've somehow convinced yourself that because they have commited physical adultery, that they will forever be in a state of spiritual adultery, and therefore cannot serve. You've decided there's no way for them to repent and become right with God again. You've decided that they are going to remain in a state where they will repeatedly commit adultery and divorce and remarriage. May this judgement not be held against you.

By the way, adultery is not just a crime against God. It is a crime against your own body, your spouse and your children (if you have any). It doesn't matter if society doesn't consider it a crime against your spouse and children anymore - it still is.


​

 

The problem I see in the church is that people do not seem to be repentant over divorce at all. It's just another thing that happens, like in the world.

I am not sure if remarriage is right or wrong, but I do respect the decision of pastors who do not remarry people who have been divorced.

I tend to think if the divorce is due to adultery on the part of the spouse, or an unbelieving spouse leaving, then the person can divorce. However, I still think the innocent party should wait and pray for the spouse to be convicted and for reconciliation. How long? Maybe if and until the guilty party remarries. Until then, reconciliation is always possible with the power of God.

 

npet:

I appreciate the way you reason with me, but, please reread my posts.
I did not say that those who divorce and remarried before joining the church are unforgiven.
It is those who are in church who divorce and then remarry other spouses that we cannot accept as members. Here is a theoretical situation:

First, we have labored with them, opening up Scriptures, pointing out what God says about divorce, how God feels about divorce, and why divorce was allowed.

Second, we prayed with them.

However, they preferred to go ahead and divorce each other.
So long as they remain unmarried to other spouses, they are welcome as members in the church who may serve in whatever capacity or ministry they feel they are led of the Lord to do.

However, if they both, or one of them, remarry, then they or the one who remarried are practicing adultery, because that is what the Scriptures say, and anyone who says that is not so, is twisting Scripture to his favor.

In that case, practicing adulterers or adulteresses cannot be members of the church, and I am sure that if you hold Christ up to a high standard in your church, neither will they be accepted in your church.

I think there is something inherently wrong about falling back on the 'we were saved by grace' reasoning when trying to argue about something which the Scriptures have repeatedly called sin.

I mean, in my time I bashed and stuck people, and enjoyed it, for no reason at all other than I didn't like the way they looked at me, but now I know Christ has covered even that sin, and the sin of the future, and I am one of God's own from the very beginning.

Does that mean I may now merrily go ahead and just bash and stick anyone, even if I know it is sin against my God, and reason out that I am saved by grace ?

 

I should add, this is because sin is in the mind and not the physical act.

 

See my other post in response to this. I agree 100% that in this scenario, you are doing right to prevent them from remaining members in your church. They are continuing in their sin without repentance.

I still don't know how your church handles the situation if these people actually repent. I don't know of many cases (any, for that matter) where people like this ever repent. It's not easy to admit to your new husband (or wife) that you should never have gotten involved with him/her in the first place, and that is was all wrong, but now it's too late to undo it. IMO, although I've never been in this situation, it's probably actually easier to admit that to God than it is to your new spouse.

But I'm just proposing that this is the case. The new couple both repent of what they did, admit it was all wrong, beg forgiveness of God and the church (and their former spouses), but acknowledge that it's too late to undo it. I would reinstate these people as members and bring them back into fellowship, myself. I simply think it's the right thing to do.

But if they carry on and attempt to justify what they did, I agree with you. They're sinning continually without repentance.

 

I believe this is growth and the perfecting work of Christ.

I'd ask for my boot back.

 

Sounds like he'd have to disinfect it if he wanted to use it again.

 

It seems most of the problem centers around what Pinyo's opinion is of who is committing adultry by remarriage. Ignoring Matt 5:32 is not the way to learn about the subject. Picking and choosing verses to create a belief system that agrees with the way you think it should be is not what learning Scripture is all about.

Another thing, either you believe one way or the other and stick to it. The timing of the "sin" (ie before church membership or during) has nothing to do with the situation, and only confuses the issue. Maybe we should add another requirement such as was the wind blowing from the east or west at sunrise this morning, or did the stock market go up yesterday. The Pharisees were quite good at this.

 

I agree Saturneptune;
That the timing has absolutely nothing to do with it. Also, we can't ignore Matt 5:32 for it is all we really have to work with.

 

How can you be fruitful and multiply unless you are married.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Also people keep saying that its the old teastament way however the bible says that there is nothing new under the sun.

Ecc 1:9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

I dont condone divorce and I have never been divorced I have been married for 15yrs to my wife however Jesus died for all sins and we are told not to judge others

Jam 4:11 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.

Heb 13:4 Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
God is the judge not you or me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1Co 6:5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?

No one is wise enought to judge no not one.

I dont know the answer however I am not to judge another christian who has been divorced. How can you be fruitful unless you be married. Just a question to ponder on. Also if you want to take it to extremes what about someone that is married and has no children because they dont want kids do you judge them as sinners, probably not. What about a single person that has never been married do you judge that person for not being fruitful and multiplying, probably not again. You could go on and on judging people but then again it none of our business its Gods business and people just want to put themselves in the place of God which by the way is a sin.

 

MorganT:

Hi, there, pleased to meet you.
The issue, with all due respects, is divorce and remarriage.
If you know of any Scriptures that says it is okay to remarry after divorce, then post them, and explain why you think these Scriptures say it is alright.

 

Jesus also taught some are eunuchs for the kingdom sake.

 

Where did Jimmy Carter say he "lusted all the time?" "Almost ruined himself if he could go any lower.'

I know his statement about lust came in an interview with Playboy Magazine but I don't remember anything this extreme. You're "stretching the truth" with this.

 

You got to be kidding. It hit every newspaper all over the world that Jimmy Carter said he lusted after women. I don't think that is stretching it. Anyway, worst president we ever had.

 

Worse than Ford?

 

Yes, worse than Ford and Nixon, in fact, worse than Bush as much as I dont like him.

 

RE:Marriage and divorce

In answer to the question should a person remarry after divorce I would like to submit the following for consideration?

First Genesis is clear that marriage was not for procreation but for loneliness.

Genesis 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

Secondly when divorce occurs the marriage is legally set aside providing every effort has been extended to reconcile the marriage prior to divorce. Once again this is exactly like church discipline where every effort to reconcile the wayward member to the local body when all effort fails church discipline is exercised in order to the offending party back to God and ultimately reunite them with the local body.

As an example the man whom Paul called for the church to discipline in 1 Corinthians was reunited to the church in 2 Corinthians. The length of time he was set apart from the body was at least two years based on the times of Paul’s writing. The thought that applies to remarriage is that a time frame cannot be established as to how long they should wait for remarriage eventually they will determine to

1. Repent and remarry (God’s grace hath appeared to all men)
2. One will tire and marry thereby freeing the other to marry (Jeremiah 3:1)
3. Or both will live life as a single the same as many widows do. (1 Cor 7:11)
4. One party or the other may die freeing the other to remarry. (1 Cor 7:39)

Since neither party is married after divorce there is no such thing as adultery they can fornicate which places them in the position of open sin and church discipline but they cannot break their vows because they are no longer married.

Once one of the above conditions is met (except #3) there is nothing wrong with remarriage only that we are to marry in the Lord.

As a side comment, in the case of fornication by a member of the local church when discipline is carried out the offending spouse would be exhorted to repent of their sin openly and if they refuse they would then be removed from membership and treated as a heathen by church body. If the one who has church discipline exercised against them seeks divorce then 1 Cor 7:15 comes into play and the spouse is free to marry whom they would, only in the Lord.

I trust this is a help

thjplgvp

 

I believe I remember the quote as "I have lusted in my heart many times," or something close to that.

The divorce issue will never be settled. I've noticed a few things through the years: (1) people's views of remarriage become more permissive when their own kids are involved, (2) one of the primary rules of interpretation, "interpret obscure passages by clear ones," is routinely violated in the debate, and (3) folks tend to decide what God wants before they open the Bible and read. They know what he wants because they know that he wants what they themselves want. "MY GOD would never ..." (In fact, "their God" never does anything they disagree with.)

These errors keep people from taking my position on the issue.