Husband of one Wife

And I am sure there are just as many busy-bodies, gossips, haughty, fornicators, etc., along with a few liars as well. The list could go on and on.

 

"For married people I have a command which is not my own but the Lord's: a wife must not leave her husband; but if she does, she must remain single or else be reconciled to her husband; and a husband must not divorce his wife. To the others I say (I, myself, not the Lord): if a Christian man has a wife who is an unbeliever and she agrees to go on living with him, he must not divorce her. And if a Christian woman is married to a man who is an unbeliever and he agrees to go on living with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made acceptable to God by being united to his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made acceptable to God by being united to her Christian husband. If this were not so, their children would be like pagan children; but as it is, they are acceptable to God. However, if the one who is not a believer wishes to leave the Christian partner, let it be so. In such cases the Christian partner, whether husband or wife, is free to act. God has called you to live in peace. How can you be sure, Christian wife, that you will not save your husband? Or how can you be sure, Christian husband, that you will not save your wife?" 1 Cor. 7:10-16

Paul says that (a) the wife shouldn't leave/divorce her husband, and (b) if she does, she must remain celibate or reconcile with her husband.

1. Why doesn't Paul understand that the woman HAS no husband? She's divorced, you see. She can't be "reconciled to her husband" because she has no husband - right?

2. Why doesn't Paul understand that there is no need for the woman to remain celibate? She's unmarried (divorced), right? So why can't she remarry? Paul says this command comes from God, but surely God wouldn't continue to punish her for the sin of divorce, would he? Once she repents of the divorce, all's well - right?

 

See the responses on the Poll, Gershom.

My point about the 'divorce after divorce, again and again and again and again' is to point out some of those who excuse divorce for numerous non biblical issues are caught in a pattern of 'I deserve better', 'God would want me to be happy', 'He yelled at me' type excuses for those divorces. One divorce can 'numb' a family to the pain divorce causes until divorce becomes a pattern of life in the parents and then their children. Control of his household? Certainly NOT!

How many divorces would you excuse before a man would not be considered for deacon under the standards our more liberal brothers extend? Would 3 divorces not show that this man or woman is not in control of their life? Would it take 5? More than 5? When do you realize that divorce is not only a sin issue but an ego, poor character trait and pride issue in many instances?

 

So if the widow had her first husband to die when she was 30, she remarried at 40, & second husband died when she was 70, then she is NOT entitled to "be put on the list"?

Sumpin' ain't kosher here! </font>[/QUOTE]Let's see, does it mean that:

(1) Women who had one husband in life were on the list, while widows who had a second were excluded?

(2) Women who were divorced and remarried were excluded, and that's all he was referring to by "one man"?

(3) Women who were married to one man at a time (including divorcees) could go on the list, but women with multiple husbands (polyandrists) were excluded?

Answers 1 and 3 are absurd. Answer 2 is correct, and it gels with the other scriptures.

 

1) George is not disqualified because his divorce (due to wife's adultery). Conservatives say that "fornication" (porneia) refers to something that occurs before marriage, and nothing that occurs after the marriage can justify divorce. But I have the most liberal position that one can have and still be called Biblical: divorce is allowed for adultery, but only for adultery.

2) Larry is unqualified for many reasons.

 

If you marry one woman and remain married, you have one wife.

If you are a widower and remarry, you have one wife.

If you "divorce" (except for porneia) and remarry, you have two wives and you commit adultery with the second against the first.

 

That makes no sense at all. If your first wife dies, and you remarry, she is, by definition, your second wife. But you still only have one.

If you divorce and remarry, she is by definition, your second wife. But you still only have one. You do not have two wives.

 

Again, Jesus says that if you legally divorce, you are still married in God's eyes to the first one (ie, you commit adultery against the first wife). This has been the constant teaching of Christianity since the beginning, and even the Catholics don't dispute that.

Such a man has two wives: (a) his wife in God's eyes - the first wife, and (b) his legal wife, the second wife.

 

A lot of heat and not much light on this thread. Can anyone shed some light on these questions? Thanks.

 

Did the early church interpret the passage in a way that says divorced men, living with a second "wife," commit no sin and therefore can be deacons? Or did the early church believe that men who divorce and remarry are constantly committing adultery with their new "spouse"?

It looks to me that they did not allow divorce and remarriage, even for fornication. Those who "remarried" were still married to the first spouse and were committing adultery. Only when the divorced spouse dies can you remarry without being an adulterer.

================================================
Shepherd of Hermas: "What then shall the husband do, if the wife continue in this disposition [adultery]? Let him divorce her, and let the husband remain single. But if he divorce his wife and marry another, he too commits adultery" (The Shepherd 4:1:6 [A.D. 80]).

Justin Martyr: "In regard to chastity, [Jesus] has-this to say: 'If anyone look with lust at a woman, he has already before God committed adultery in his heart.' And, 'Whoever marries a woman who has been divorced from another husband, commits adultery.' According to our Teacher, just as they are sinners who contract a second marriage, even though it be in accord with human law, so also are they sinners who look with lustful desire at a woman. He repudiates not only one who actually commits adultery, but even one who wishes to do so; for not only our actions are manifest to God, but even our thoughts" (First Apology 15 [A.D. 151]).

Clement of Alexandria: "Now that the Scripture counsels marriage, and allows no release from the union, is expressly contained in the law, 'Thou shalt not put away thy wife, except for the cause of fornication;' and it regards as fornication, the marriage of those separated while the other is alive. Not to deck and adorn herself beyond what is becoming, renders a wife free of calumnious suspicion. while she devotes herself assiduously to prayers and supplications; avoiding frequent departures from the house, and shutting herself up as far as possible from the view of all not related to her, and deeming housekeeping of more consequence than impertinent trifling. 'He that taketh a woman that has been put away,' it is said, 'committeth adultery; and if one puts away his wife, he makes her an adulteress,' that is, compels her to commit adultery. And not only is he who puts her away guilty of this, but he who takes her, by giving to the woman the opportunity of sinning; for did he not take her, she would return to her husband." {Stromata, 2:24 (A.D. 202), in ANF, II:379}

Origen: "Just as a woman is an adulteress, even though she seem to be married to a man, while a former husband yet lives, so also the man who seems to marry her who has been divorced does not marry her, but, according to the declaration of our Savior, he commits adultery with her"

(Commentaries on Matthew 14:24 [A.D. 248]).

Council of Elvira: "Likewise, women who have left their husbands for no prior cause and have joined themselves with others, may not even at death receive communion" (canon 8 [A.D. 300]).

"Likewise, a woman of the faith [i.e., a baptized person] who has left an adulterous husband of the faith and marries another, her marrying in this manner is prohibited. If she has so married, she may not at any more receive communion--unless he that she has left has since departed from this world" (ibid., canon 9).

"if a woman of the faithful is taken in marriage by a man who left an innocent wife, and if she knew that he had a wife whom he had left without cause, it is determined that communion is not to be given to her even at death" (ibid., canon 10)

John Chrysostom: "'What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.' See a teacher's wisdom. I mean, that being asked, Is it lawful? He did not at once say, It is not lawful, lest they should be disturbed and put in disorder, but before the decision by His argument He rendered this manifest, showing that it is itself too the commandment of His Father, and that not in opposition to Moses did He enjoin these things, but in full agreement with him. But mark Him arguing strongly not from the creation only, but also from His command. For He said not, that He made one man and one woman only, but that He also gave this command that the one man should be joined to the one woman. But if it had been His will that he should put this one away, and bring in another, when He had made one man, He would have formed many Women. But now both by the manner of the creation, and by the manner of lawgiving, He showed that one man must dwell with one woman continually, and never break off from her." {On Matthew, 62:1 (A.D. 370), in NPNF1,X:382}

Basil the Great: "A man who marries after another man's wife has been taken away from him will be charged with adultery in the case of the first woman; but in the case of the second he will be guiltless" (Second Canonical Letter to Amphilochius 199:37 [A.D. 375]).

"No one is permitted to know a woman other than his wife. The marital right is given you for this reason: lest you fall into the snare and sin with a strange woman. 'If you are bound to a wife do not seek a divorce'; for you are not permitted, while your wife lives, to marry another." (Abraham 1:7:59 [A.D. 387]).

"You dismiss your wife, therefore, as if by right and without being charged with wrongdoing; and you suppose it is proper for you to do so because no human law forbids it; but divine law forbids it. Anyone who obeys men ought to stand in awe of God. Hear the law of the Lord, which even they who propose our laws must obey: 'What God has joined together let no man put asunder'" (Commentary on Luke 8:5 [A.D. 389]).

Jerome: "Do not tell me about the violence of the ravisher, about the persuasiveness of a mother, about the authority of a father, about the influence of relatives, about the intrigues and insolence of servants, or about household [financial] losses. So long as a husband lives, be he adulterer, be he sodomite, be he addicted to every kind of vice, if she left him on account of his crimes he is still her husband still and she may not take another" (Letters 55:3 [A.D. 396]).

"Wherever there is fornication and a suspicion of fornication a wife is freely dismissed. Because it is always possible that someone may calumniate the innocent and, for the sake of a second joining in marriage, act in criminal fashion against the first, it is commanded that when the first wife is dismissed a second may not be taken while the first lives" (Commentaries on Matthew 3:19:9 [A.D. 398]).

Augustine: "Neither can it rightly be held that a husband who dismisses his wife because of fornication and marries another does not commit adultery. For there is also adultery on the part of those who, after the repudiation of their former wives because of fornication, marry others. This adultery, nevertheless, is certainly less serious than that of men who dismiss their wives for reasons other than fornication and take other wives. Therefore, when we say: 'Whoever marries a woman dismissed by her husband for reason other than fornication commits adultery,' undoubtedly we speak the truth. But we do not thereby acquit of this crime the man who marries a woman who was dismissed because of fornication. We do not doubt in the least that both are adulterers. We do indeed pronounce him an adulterer who dismissed his wife for cause other than fornication and marries another, nor do we thereby defend from the taint of this sin the man who dismissed his wife because of fornication and marries another. We recognize that both are adulterers, though the sin of one is more grave than that of the other. No one is so unreasonable to say that a man who marries a woman whose husband has dismissed her because of fornication is not an adulterer, while maintaining that a man who marries a woman dismissed without the ground of fornication is an adulterer. Both of these men are guilty of adultery" (Adulterous Marriages 1:9:9 [A.D. 419]).

"A woman begins to be the wife of no later husband unless she has ceased to be the wife of a former one. She will cease to be the wife of a former one, however, if that husband should die, not if he commit fornication. A spouse, therefore, is lawfully dismissed for cause of fornication; but the bond of chastity remains. That is why a man is guilty of adultery if he marries a woman who has been dismissed even for this very reason of fornication" (ibid., 2:4:4).
==============================================

Given this, even if the verse means a "one-woman man," a divorced and remarried man cannot possibly be a "one-woman man" - he is an adulterer.

 

You are confused. A divorced man is not cheating on his wife. He is divorced from her.

Jesus said no such thing. He recognized that divorce ends a marriage. There is no such thing as "married in God's eyes" in the way you are using it.

The consistent testimony of Scripture is that divorce ends a marriage. It is an exercise in absurdity to talk about "marriage in God's eyes."

This is a place where you need to be radically biblical. Divorce is not God's intention, but it was allowed, and it did end the marriage. The marriage does not continue after divorce.

LEt me ask it this way: If someone divorced their spouse, would you tell them they are still allowed to have sexual relations with that spouse?

 

Who of you here disagrees with Jesus, and says that such a person does not commit adultery? Be honest. </font>[/QUOTE]Can anybody who believes you can divorce in God's eyes (except for fornication/porneia), and the divorce is a sin but then you repent and it's all over... can you please explain what Jesus meant?

Why does Jesus call it "adultery" for you to marry a "put away" (legally divorced) woman? Why does Jesus call it "adultery" for you to put away your wife and marry another? If God recognizes these legal "divorces," then what was Jesus saying? I'm still waiting.... </font>[/QUOTE]Matthew 19:9, what did Jesus mean when he called it "adultery" to marry after legal divorce? Anyone? Bueller?

 

MANCHESTER why did you avoid this verse, and why did YOU avoid this question?

 

MANCHESTER why did you avoid this verse, and why did YOU avoid this question? </font>[/QUOTE]I've already said that my position is the far left liberal of Biblically tenable positions: divorce is allowed for fornication. Conservatives disagree with me on this, but there is support in Jesus's words for my position.

I see no contradiction in the two verses:

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.

Mat 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.

BTW, neither verse says the man can't divorce. It just says he cannot remarry without being an adulterer. And his divorced wife, when she remarries, is an adulteress. Nothing says he cannot divorce and live celibately. In fact, Paul talks about doing that very sort of thing in a positive light.

[ March 17, 2005, 08:22 PM: Message edited by: manchester ]

 

Thank you. That clarifies somewhat.

 

I would not hire a person for church treasurer
who embezzled money prior to salvation.
Sorry, i just wouldn't.

I would not hire a person to work with children
in Sunday School who had molested children
before salvation. Sorry, I just woulldn't.

 

Jesus didn't say that. He said you could remarry after divorce from fornication. You can't twist the exception clause around and pretend like it doesn't exist. Furthermore, you have to understand Scripture as a whole and look at all the Bible's teaching on the matter. In the OT, remarriage after divorce was allowed. In 1 Cor 7, remarriage after divorce is specifically said to not be sin. I have a hard time contradicting Scripture to meet up with the standards that someone else has.

 

Oh but Larry, it does give them ample opportunity to fill in all those blanks that God left.

In "God's eyes" seems to be strangely in bondage with "in the eyes" of several posters here.