Does God ever permit divorce?

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Brother Bob:
Permit me to play a little "hardball" here. If someone is in that condition then if they repent and come to the church then their condition is ok? What if instead of adultery they are stealing, killing or lying could they repent and come to the church and continue in the same life style? Just asking the hard questions now.

No, they do not continue in their sin. There is, IMHO, a clear distinction between falling into sin and walking in sin (1 John 5). The truly born-again believer does not habitually walk and live in sin. Confession and repentance are more and deeper than "I'm sorry." These involve a change in direction and attitude toward sin. BTW, I believe in church, seldom done today, where the sinning church member faces broken fellowship if he fails to repent (turn from his wickedness).

 

[Brother Bob]

We also withdraw from those who have sinned. We feel in order to get right you must do it outside of the church for to try to make it right with God while being a hypocrit is impossible. You say they do not continue in sin but where I have difficulty understanding is why it was sin before the came to the church but still the same thing but it is no longer sin. Seems if that is true then it would be the same with lying or any of the others that by coming to the church lying would no longer be a sin if adultery is no longer a sin. I hope I am making myself clear and do you understand what I am comparing the two?

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Brother Bob:
I agree in having mercy and love but when the Scripture says "he that putteth away his wife, saving the cause of fornication, committeth adultery" it is hard to see where love and mercy makes it right or ok.

I advocate church discipline to preserve the purity of the church as set forth in Scripture but I am opposed when men misuse it to gain power, crush their enemies or portray a "holier than thou" stance. Love and mercy keeps church discipline in its proper use, IMHO.

Furthermore, I believe that the proper church discipline before the divorce, when the problems first appear, will prevent later problems with the questions of divorced and remarried people. Blame needs to be accessed and assigned. IMHO, the marriage covenant has already been violated before the divorce occurs. When both spouses are living right, walking with God and fulfilling their covenantal responsibilities, marriages work great and there is never an issue of divorce. Divorce is always the result of some human sin. There is always fault or blame.

 

[paidagogos]

 

[Brother Bob]

We also withdraw from those who have sinned. We feel in order to get right you must do it outside of the church for to try to make it right with God while being a hypocrit is impossible. You say they do not continue in sin but where I have difficulty understanding is why it was sin before the came to the church but still the same thing but it is no longer sin. Seems if that is true then it would be the same with lying or any of the others that by coming to the church lying would no longer be a sin if adultery is no longer a sin. I hope I am making myself clear and do you understand what I am comparing the two?

 

[Brother Bob]

double post?

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Brother Bob:
We also withdraw from those who have sinned. We feel in order to get right you must do it outside of the church for to try to make it right with God while being a hypocrit is impossible. You say they do not continue in sin but where I have difficulty understanding is why it was sin before the came to the church but still the same thing but it is no longer sin. Seems if that is true then it would be the same with lying or any of the others that by coming to the church lying would no longer be a sin if adultery is no longer a sin. I hope I am making myself clear and do you understand what I am comparing the two?

How long does it take one to get it right? Scripture (Matthew 18) seems to indicate that church discipline is a step-wise process beginning at the lowest level and culminating in expulsion and breaking of fellowship if the individual does not repent. However, if he repents along the way, he is to be restored and fellowship preserved. Paul (II Corinthians) indicates that the brother is to be restored to fellowship as soon as he repents. The scenario is that the Corinthian had failed to discipline a brother guilty of incest until Paul send the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Then, they swung the pendulum too far in the opposite direction and did not accept him back after he repented so that Paul had to write a second epistle (2 Corinthians). Unfortunately, this seems to be typical—we go too far in one direction or the other.

 

[Brother Bob]

Paidagogos;
I see you are not going to answer. The examples you give the man had quit his incest and all the others had quit their sins but man has made an exception for adultery no matter how you cut it. You are not alone for almost all I know sidestep this one issue and I hope you are right with every thing in me. Nice talking with you and hope I didn't step on your toes.

BBob

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
Paidagogos,

do you not think that my post as many others were a rebuke to mr sanderson, who never seems to want to answer to comments or questions by others?

I did nothing wrong, nor did many on here. And yes, we are commanded to rebuke, reprove, exhort with all longsuffering.

It might be looked at differently if mr anderson were just posting these posts on this board, but he is on at least 3 other boards posting these same boards and never answers to any of them.

I stand by what God has revealed to me through His Spirit. Mr Anderson's posts reveal a cultish teaching and preaching. 'I am right and you are wrong' preaching is not of God. We are to preach the Word of God with Love toward mankind. Mr Anderson's messages are far from love.

To a third party observer who is more interested in ideas and truth than winning an exchange of repartee, you are like unto Mr. Sanderson from the other side of the issue. Rather than engaging and making his assertions appear foolish, you have vilified and heaped scorn on the man rather than refuting his ideas. This is no way for Christians to debate. (BTW, I will stipulate that Mr. Sanderson did wrong and handled his posting poorly but this doesn’t justify his bashing.) You plead for love and understanding for mankind but you show only scorn, ridicule and venom for Mr. Sanderson. If he is such a great sinner, then isn’t he to be compassionately pitied and loved along with the rest of the poor sinners? Your emotional outbursts and defensive posts belie your professed values. One can rebuke words and actions with candor without vilifying and pillorying the individual.

BTW, your use of the word “cultish” is unjustified and emotionally laden. If you think this is cultic, then you have not read the mainstream of evangelical literature on this subject. I recommend your reading of authors Lane, Wenham, Heth, Adams, and Murray who represent a fair spectrum of evangelical Biblical thought—I didn’t bother to include the liberals and fluff writers.

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Brother Bob:
Paidagogos;
I see you are not going to answer. The examples you give the man had quit his incest and all the others had quit their sins but man has made an exception for adultery no matter how you cut it. You are not alone for almost all I know sidestep this one issue and I hope you are right with every thing in me. Nice talking with you and hope I didn't step on your toes.
BBob

Brother Bob, I thought that I addressed your question. If not, I don't understand what you are asking. Could you please restate it succinctly?

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Originally posted by paidagogos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
If one preaches contrary to the Word of God, that one is as much as calling the Word of God a lie

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. Jesus said,

Matthew 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth 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.

It is quite clear by these passages that Jesus does permit divorce for the cause of fornication.

Yet, mr andersons said, 'Does Jesus permit divorce? I think not'

He has spoken contrary to the clear Word of God.

BTW, are you trying to impress someone by the big words? Cuz it ain't working.

 

[Brother Bob]

Why do we treat adultery different than other sins.
If a person comes and says God has forgiven him but he is still lying or stealing then we would turn him away.
If a person comes and says God has forgiven him even though he is in adultery we accept him.

I think it is a double standard, but because we have been overwhelmed with it, we turn a blind eye just for this one sin. For the life of me I don't understand how, coming to the church allows a person to continue in an Adulterous situation. How does that make it not adultery anymore and if it does make it unadultery then why is the same not true for liars etc, they have to quit.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

I have to agree with Shiloh's post. God does permit (allow) divorce. It is not His will, but He allows it to happen.

If God did not permit divorces, there would be no divorces whatsoever, for God would stop the divorce before it happened.

That said, The statement in the OP, "Does God ever permit divorce? I think not!" is contrary to God's Word.

 

[Karen]

Brother Bob,
I am not understanding your question.
I don't see how adultery is being treated differently UNLESS you make the presumption that the very act of being married after divorce is ongoing adultery.
Many would say that there is no ongoing adultery, the person has quit adultery (if they ever started), if they are remarried after a divorce that the Bible allows.

Karen

 

[Karen]

duplicate

 

[Brother Bob]

sfic;
He certainly allows it to happen over 50% in this nation last count I heard.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Yes, Brother Bob. Unfortunately, the divorce rate is very high. Television, Radio, Movie Theatres, Hollywood, Paris, Las Vegas, Reno, the list goes on and on, all paint a pretty picture of divorce. One can make any excuse for divorce and it is ok.

Divorces were never meant from the beginning, and yet, man continues to divorce.

One of the biggest causes for divorce today is man marrying not out of love, but out of lust. The lust of the flesh can carry a person into a lifestyle of sin and defeat.

One needs to look at the Word of God and see what marriage was meant to be. Yes, it was meant to be between one man, and one woman; and, might I add, for life.

Genesisi 2:21 - 24 shows us God's desire for mankind as pertaining to marriage.

Genesis 2:21-24 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. {made: Heb. builded} And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. {Woman: Heb. Isha} {Man: Heb. Ish} Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Notice God brought the woman to man. He did not tell Adam, go find a woman. David said in the Book of the Psalms, 'I waited patiently on the Lord, and He inclined unto me.' Man needs to wait on the Lord. God will put the woman in His path that God has made for that man.

Man is marrying today to fulfill his sinful lusts rather than out of love. For this reason, the divorce rate in America has skyrocketed.

Does God permit divorce? Yes, but it was never His will.

 

[Brother Bob]

Karen;
I am not talking about the marriages that the Bible allows. I am talking about the ones it doesn't allow. I am asking if the ones the Bible doesn't allow become ok after coming to the church and I know the answer for most but still does not answer the Scriptures. Just trying to see if someone can shed some light on it that I have never been able to see.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

A good question would be...

Looking at the two referrenced verses (Matthew 5:32; 19:9), is the act of adultery an ongoing thing or a one time thing?

He that marries her that is put away (divorced) committeth adultery. Is the adultery committed just at time of marriage and consumation? or continuing through that marriage?

 

[Hope of Glory]

So, is your solution to require them to divorce again?