Can either of them be considered as, "born again," to enter the kingdom of God, whatever kingdom of God means in that context?
-
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!
Marriage/divorce/remarriage/adultery
- Thread starter BrotherJoseph
- Start date
Can either of them be considered as, "born again," to enter the kingdom of God, whatever kingdom of God means in that context?
Ok, to be 100% clear with your view I gather the following conclusions:
1. You would advise them to stay married
2. They are not condemned to hell automatically for their sin of adultery, however they are in a state of sin for the remainder of their life so they are cut off from true church fellowship? You stated that they could attend church but not join as members. In other words, they carry some degree of sin that could potentially taint the church. So by not being a true member you can basically come and watch church through a window, but you cannot serve, make friends, pray together, go to small group, etc? (You will need to elaborate on your stipulations on this aspect please.
If you sincerely believe what I wrote in number 2 I would highly disagree because you have taken scripture and gone outside its original intent with the "no member" theory. I think the bible is clear, you either are a believer or you are not. If you are you are never cut off from Christ or His church and have forgiveness. There is no such thing as partial benefits to the faith biblically. Now If there is an clear sin or something going on then the church must take action and in bad cases boot someone out the door, but for true believers who have moved on in life their sins are no more and they have no limitations in the overall church sense. However, If one has committed a sin that could ban him/her from a leadership role that is possible, but never from the church.
I have a biblical question for you, what happens to a sheep that wonders from the flock or who is pushed away from the flock? Is it not true that it is only a matter of time before the sheep is devoured by a predator? The same is true of a sincere believer who you close the door to in the church.
I have little to contribute to the thread except to correct a glaring error.
It is the matter of "biblical" divorce.
Paul states (1 Cor.) :
Now let's look at the direct statement by the Lord Jesus Christ (Matthew 19):
Now there is the common misconception that adultery cancels the marriage. THAT is not what is meant in the statement by Christ, for if it were then mere man could undo what God has joined.
So to answer the question of WHEN can believer's divorce and it not violate God's standard, one must take the statement of Christ who is addressing the religious righteous of His day and what is involved in what THEY considered marriage.
To the Jews of that cultural day, the marriage took place, BUT the bride and groom did not come together as "one flesh" (or consummation) until the groom had prepared a place for his bride. When the groom's father agreed that the place was finished, then the groom would go to the house of the bride's father and "steal" away the bride.
It was during THIS TIME (a time when the marriage has taken place, but the groom and bride are not "one flesh") that divorce can take place and it fit to the standard that the Lord Jesus Christ established.
It is true that the "protestant" church has not kept this standard. IMO, the standard was lowered when Henry the VIII desired to find some justification for his many wives.
So, those writing about the OP, now should consider the BIBLICAL standard as related to divorce, and not try to consider some lesser human adopted standard that only brings sorrow.
One last comment:
To those who have injured their living and damaged their life as a believer by divorce, there is a great God who forgives. A tremendous blessing in recognizing the failure and determining it will never be repeated. For the example that you can show by admitting the failure, and encouraging others in their own walk as a believer.
I am in no position to bring any condemnation to those who have had such great sorrow enter their lives. I am convinced that service to Christ (though no longer able to be as it could have been) is never - the - less built upon a daily commitment to The Lord of the whole heart, mind, soul, and strength (body).
Therefore, to the so dedicated believer, "THERE IS THEREFORE NO CONDEMNATION..." (Romans 8) no matter the events, the heartaches, the things past, present or whatever the future holds.
Get on serving the Lord, and do not be shackled to the past.
It is the matter of "biblical" divorce.
Paul states (1 Cor.) :
But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
Then Paul continues to address one who becomes a believer and the partner does not, AND this is PAUL's statement NOT the Lord:
But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away. (1 Cor. 7)
Further he states:
Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.
Ok, that is the statement recorded and applicable to the church.
Now let's look at the direct statement by the Lord Jesus Christ (Matthew 19):
Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?”
And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
They *said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
He *said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.”
But He said to them, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it.”
And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
They *said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
He *said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.”
But He said to them, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it.”
Now there is the common misconception that adultery cancels the marriage. THAT is not what is meant in the statement by Christ, for if it were then mere man could undo what God has joined.
So to answer the question of WHEN can believer's divorce and it not violate God's standard, one must take the statement of Christ who is addressing the religious righteous of His day and what is involved in what THEY considered marriage.
To the Jews of that cultural day, the marriage took place, BUT the bride and groom did not come together as "one flesh" (or consummation) until the groom had prepared a place for his bride. When the groom's father agreed that the place was finished, then the groom would go to the house of the bride's father and "steal" away the bride.
It was during THIS TIME (a time when the marriage has taken place, but the groom and bride are not "one flesh") that divorce can take place and it fit to the standard that the Lord Jesus Christ established.
It is true that the "protestant" church has not kept this standard. IMO, the standard was lowered when Henry the VIII desired to find some justification for his many wives.
So, those writing about the OP, now should consider the BIBLICAL standard as related to divorce, and not try to consider some lesser human adopted standard that only brings sorrow.
One last comment:
To those who have injured their living and damaged their life as a believer by divorce, there is a great God who forgives. A tremendous blessing in recognizing the failure and determining it will never be repeated. For the example that you can show by admitting the failure, and encouraging others in their own walk as a believer.
I am in no position to bring any condemnation to those who have had such great sorrow enter their lives. I am convinced that service to Christ (though no longer able to be as it could have been) is never - the - less built upon a daily commitment to The Lord of the whole heart, mind, soul, and strength (body).
Therefore, to the so dedicated believer, "THERE IS THEREFORE NO CONDEMNATION..." (Romans 8) no matter the events, the heartaches, the things past, present or whatever the future holds.
Get on serving the Lord, and do not be shackled to the past.
I would say you are right....Matt. 19:9
And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”
"marries another"; Jesus acknowledges that they are married to another now. He doesn't call it a false marriage. It is a legitimate covenant. You entered into it by sinning, but you are now in a covenant. To divorce your 2nd spouse would be to sin further. I don't see the 2nd marriage as a perpetual sin. To demand someone divorce their 2nd spouse before allowing entry into the church is asking them break an ordained covenant. Asking someone to sin, cannot and must not be a requirement for church fellowship.
Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
Wayne Grudem, ESV Study Bible article.
"Jesus says that in such a case the person has committed “adultery” (Matt. 19:9), so the marriage began with adultery. But when Jesus says, “and marries another” in that same verse, he implies that the second marriage is in fact a true marriage. Jesus does not say, “and lives outside of marriage with another” (which was possible, see John 4:18), but “and marries another.” Therefore, once a second marriage has occurred, it would be further sin to break it up, for it would be destroying another marriage. The second marriage should not be thought of as continually living in adultery, for the man and woman are married to each other, not to anyone else. The responsibility of the husband and wife in such a case is to ask God for his forgiveness for previous sin, and then for his blessing on the current marriage, and to strive to make the current marriage a good and lasting one."
Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
"Jesus says that in such a case the person has committed “adultery” (Matt. 19:9), so the marriage began with adultery. But when Jesus says, “and marries another” in that same verse, he implies that the second marriage is in fact a true marriage. Jesus does not say, “and lives outside of marriage with another” (which was possible, see John 4:18), but “and marries another.” Therefore, once a second marriage has occurred, it would be further sin to break it up, for it would be destroying another marriage. The second marriage should not be thought of as continually living in adultery, for the man and woman are married to each other, not to anyone else. The responsibility of the husband and wife in such a case is to ask God for his forgiveness for previous sin, and then for his blessing on the current marriage, and to strive to make the current marriage a good and lasting one."
Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
BrotherMcCree,
That interpretation of Matthew 19:9 cannot be correct because it doesn't reconcile with other scripture we have on the matter. Romans 7:3, "So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." How can one marry another and not be in adultery? According to Romans 7:3 only through death and Matthew 19:9 fornication is the only other reason, both verses indicate for any other reason the person who is remarried is considered "an adulteress" (Romans 7:3) or committing "adultery" (Mathew 19:9).
Romans 7:3 explicitly states if the husband liveth, and she marries another she "shall be called an adulteress" Some people on this thread are trying to water down what is explicit and clear in Matthew 17:9 and Romans 7:3 to get the Bible to conform to modern day divorce and marriage practices (with divorce being so frequent and "acceptable".). I am glad my church does not do this. Matthew 19:9 is equally as clear as Romans 7:3, "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 does not take a theologian to understand either of these verses, but it may to twist the meaning of the verses, just as the Pharisees looked for loopholes in what Moses wrote to find excuse to divorce and remarry. This is part of the reason Christ said what he said to the Pharisees in Mathew 17:9, but it is not restricted to the Pharisees for he said it to the disciples again in the same book in Matthew 5:32.
Also brother Macree, if the interpretation you gave was correct, it would make no sense for the disciples to respond to what Jesus said about marriage and adultery with , "10 ... If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry." If Jesus was saying the 2nd marriage was indeed a marriage and ok, why would the disciples then conclude it is better not to marry? Also, why then did Christ say in the next verse, "11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given". If the 2nd marriage was valid as you contend in the commentary you provided, it wouldn't be hard for men to "receive this saying" would it. Finally, Christ concludes talking on the matter indicating a viable option is to be a eunuch (or stay unmarried), "12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.", this saying too would be out of place if Christ was saying in Matthew 17:9 a 2nd marriage is ok (even outside of fornication). To conclude, Matthew 17:9 is clear, especially when looked in context at the subsequent verses after it, for that matter so also is Romans 7:3, therefore let us take scripture for what it says, rather than changing it's interpretation to fit our modern society that is so divorce/remarriage trigger happy.
A sinner saved by grace if saved at all,
Brother Joe
Last edited:
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
Brother McCree,
I agree a person remarried a 2nd time by the law of the land should not divorce there 2nd spouse, but such a person if it not be for fornication or death of the first spouse is not eligible for church membership as they are in a state of adultery until the first spouse dies, "So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress : but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." (Romans 7:3) Romans 7:3 is not addressing polygamy as that was not common in Paul's day, therefore it must be addressing the simple issue of adultery as it relates to divorce and remarriage.
Interestingly this matter of divorce and remarriage was not addressed by the brethren who wrote the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith . I suspect it is because divorce and remarriage causing perpetual was so unheard of back in those days. For example in the United States in 1867-1879 the divorce rate was 3 %, thus the percentage of divorce and remarried was probably even much smaller than that as that was considered even more taboo. The divorce rate in 1985 rose to 50%. ( http://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Historical_Divorce_Rate_Statistics ) This is an adulterous generation and it is no surprise as Christ talked of things only getting worst before his return.
Brother Joe
]
I agree a person remarried a 2nd time by the law of the land should not divorce there 2nd spouse, but such a person if it not be for fornication or death of the first spouse is not eligible for church membership as they are in a state of adultery until the first spouse dies, "So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress : but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." (Romans 7:3) Romans 7:3 is not addressing polygamy as that was not common in Paul's day, therefore it must be addressing the simple issue of adultery as it relates to divorce and remarriage.
Interestingly this matter of divorce and remarriage was not addressed by the brethren who wrote the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith . I suspect it is because divorce and remarriage causing perpetual was so unheard of back in those days. For example in the United States in 1867-1879 the divorce rate was 3 %, thus the percentage of divorce and remarried was probably even much smaller than that as that was considered even more taboo. The divorce rate in 1985 rose to 50%. ( http://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Historical_Divorce_Rate_Statistics ) This is an adulterous generation and it is no surprise as Christ talked of things only getting worst before his return.
Brother Joe
]
Last edited:
Kevin
Active Member
I'm just curious how the posters would see a person who was married, and then abandoned by her husband for several years, before they decided to formally divorce when he wanted to re-marry. Neither one of them were Christians at the time, but the wife did become a Christian after the divorce, and due to the husband having already re-married ( and divorced when his 2nd wife found herself a wife of her own ) they could not be remarried due to:
Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (KJV)
1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
The woman who is now a Christian marries a Christian man. My thoughts say this second marriage is totally acceptable. If for no other reason they were she and her husband were not Christians at the time of the marriage and divorce, and not under the same commandments as Christians are.
Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (KJV)
1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
The woman who is now a Christian marries a Christian man. My thoughts say this second marriage is totally acceptable. If for no other reason they were she and her husband were not Christians at the time of the marriage and divorce, and not under the same commandments as Christians are.
Keven,
Welcome to the BB!
The Lord Jesus Christ when discussing the condition of husband and wife was not putting a qualifier of believer or unbeliever upon the situation. Once a marriage is consummated, the two have become "one flesh" and He states, what "God puts together let no man put asunder." Not much wiggle room, is there.
Kevin
Active Member
I think I understand where you are coming from, but I don't really agree.
In case it wasn't clear this was a real scenario, with real folks involved.
The first thing, and I am not trying to be picky about it, but the scenario I presented in my earlier post, could be considered as falling under the Biblical grounds for divorce. The husband wanted the divorce so he could marry the woman he was living with.
2 Corinthians 5:17 (KJV)
17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
The woman I spoke of became a new creature, and her old sin nature passed away when she excepted Christ. Her sins were forgiven, all of them.
John 4:16-18 (KJV)
16 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.
17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:
18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.
Here Jesus deals with the woman, but doesn't dwell on her past. He mentions her previous marriages, but doesn't go any further with it. He could have easily used this situation to be a teaching moment on divorce and marriage.
Instead her faith led her to go back and get more people to hear Jesus.
John 4:39-42 (KJV)
39 And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did.
40 So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days.
41 And many more believed because of his own word;
42 And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.
The problems in our world and country seem so obvious on how to fix them. The problem is the world isn't working from the same Biblical standards. If it is homosexuality, abortion, or divorce and re-marriage, we are talking different languages.
1 Corinthians 2:14 (KJV)
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
The big problem with divorce is how common and acceptable it has become within the body of true believers.