Mathew 5:32 and remarriage

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

There is no law, no man, and no Scriptures that allow for divorce after "one flesh."

Be very, very careful here. Are you willing to say that marriage after divorce for other than biblical reasons is unforgivable? Because that is what you're saying. Do you want to go there?

 

[agedman]

Be very, very careful here. Are you willing to say that marriage after divorce for other than biblical reasons is unforgivable? Because that is what you're saying. Do you want to go there?

Doesn't bother me at all to "go there."

It is not MY words, but the very words of Christ.

It is not what I am saying, but the very words of Christ.


Matt: 19

6“So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” 7They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?” 8He 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.


​

Matt: 5

31“It was said, ‘WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE’; 32but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.​

NOTE: Unchastity, was why Joseph wanted to "put Mary away, privately."

Mary was a VIRGIN; she and Joseph had not yet become "one flesh."

THAT is the "unchastity" in which the Lord Jesus Christ presents as a lawful reason for divorce - NOT adultery AFTER the two become one flesh.

No, woman retains her "chastity" when the two become "one flesh."

If it is not so, then Christ would have no grounds to make the statement "what GOD puts together, let no man disassemble." No grounds at all, and the whole matter would be settled with the "law of Moses."

But, the "law of Moses" wasn't the final authority. For, "from the beginning" it wasn't what God presented nor intended.

Hardness of hearts was the cause for the "law of Moses" and I have yet to see the cause for divorce as other then the "hardness of heart" as the basic reason.


The question then comes, is the situation "unforgivable?"

No.

However, just as YOU contended in another thread on the assembly facing a polygamous marriage issue and new believers in the church, the couple perhaps needs to consider FOR THEMSELVES and before the Lord what they in good conscience can live with.

However, just as I contended in that same thread, dismembering the family unit (including all partners) is NOT Scriptural, anymore than divorce after the two have become "one flesh."

However, what of the believer with an unbelieving spouse? What did Paul give as the answer when confronted with those who were believing and had spouses that were unbelieving?

If the unbelieving spouse wanted divorce - let them, but the believer was NEVER (until the death of that unbelieving spouse) to marry. The believing spouse was NEVER to seek divorce.

What do the vow to God say?

"'Til death do us part."

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

The question then comes, is the situation "unforgivable?"

No.

However, just as YOU contended in another thread on the assembly facing a polygamous marriage issue and new believers in the church, the couple perhaps needs to consider FOR THEMSELVES and before the Lord what they in good conscience can live with.

Which is exactly what I said in an earlier post, but no one seems to pay any attention to that, preferring instead to insist on the sin, without considering God's forgiveness.

However, just as I contended in that same thread, dismembering the family unit (including all partners) is NOT Scriptural, anymore than divorce after the two have become "one flesh."

That's absurd. There is no Scripture to support that contention whatsoever. And we're not going to renew that "dead horse" debate.

 

[percho]

Also you -- being dead in the trespasses and the sins, Eph 2:1 YLT

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. Matt 19:9 KJV

But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. Matt 19:22,24,25,26 KJV

Can a man before or after being called by God, live good enough in his flesh, to maintain himself unto the kingdom of God, salvation. being saved, inheriting eternal life, being incorruptible?

Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein. Luke 18:17 KJV
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:5,6 KJV

Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife. And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. Luke 20:33-36 KJV


Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein. Luke 18:17 KJV
But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. Matt 19:14

 

[zrs6v4]

I have not been online in awhile (nearly a year) and saw this was my last post. I read through it a regained interest. This topic is directly applicable to my life now and has been since I originally posted it because my current girlfriend has been divorced. Ive studied the topic before first dating her knowing her background and off and on throughout our relationship. I tend to be biased on the topic because I am dating someone who has been divorced meaning we are looking at getting married in the future.

With the above said, Id like to hear some more feedback.

How do you handle Jesus' words on the topic? Are they cut and dry?

For those who read the bible and quote Mathew 5 (or other passages) cut and dry, I have a questios:

1. I this your normal approach to scripture? Its always as simple as it says (I dont mean this to be rude)?

2. What does the context of Mathew 5 have to do with what we take from it? is it still cut and dry knowing Jewish practice on divorce?

3. Upon initial reading of Mathew 5:32 we see that Jesus said divorce is only permissible when one partner had commited adulatry. Does He want to be limited to that statement? Furthermore, what if a Christian woman has a husband who becomes a serial killer and there is a large threat on her family, would Jesus still want her to try to work it out even if that risked her childrens lives or would she be sinning?

I think studying the topic at hand is difficult because we all have reasons for what we believe and most of our beliefs sprout from our situations. What I mean here is that those of us here who have remarried obviously wont say its wrong unless they have had a bad experience, and those of us who hadnt been faced with this question as a direct application to our big decisions in life can easily read the passage and say, "Oh its simple, Jesus says no so dont do it."

Lastly, If anyone has good resources please post them for discussion. Ive listened to Macarthur, Piper, and a few others (whoever posted Piper's on here earlier this year thank you) but havent read many good scholarly articles on the topic that really dig deep into the passage.

 

[percho]

I have not been online in awhile (nearly a year) and saw this was my last post. I read through it a regained interest. This topic is directly applicable to my life now and has been since I originally posted it because my current girlfriend has been divorced. Ive studied the topic before first dating her knowing her background and off and on throughout our relationship. I tend to be biased on the topic because I am dating someone who has been divorced meaning we are looking at getting married in the future.

With the above said, Id like to hear some more feedback.

How do you handle Jesus' words on the topic? Are they cut and dry?

For those who read the bible and quote Mathew 5 (or other passages) cut and dry, I have a questios:

1. I this your normal approach to scripture? Its always as simple as it says (I dont mean this to be rude)?

2. What does the context of Mathew 5 have to do with what we take from it? is it still cut and dry knowing Jewish practice on divorce?

3. Upon initial reading of Mathew 5:32 we see that Jesus said divorce is only permissible when one partner had commited adulatry. Does He want to be limited to that statement? Furthermore, what if a Christian woman has a husband who becomes a serial killer and there is a large threat on her family, would Jesus still want her to try to work it out even if that risked her childrens lives or would she be sinning?

I think studying the topic at hand is difficult because we all have reasons for what we believe and most of our beliefs sprout from our situations. What I mean here is that those of us here who have remarried obviously wont say its wrong unless they have had a bad experience, and those of us who hadnt been faced with this question as a direct application to our big decisions in life can easily read the passage and say, "Oh its simple, Jesus says no so dont do it."

Lastly, If anyone has good resources please post them for discussion. Ive listened to Macarthur, Piper, and a few others (whoever posted Piper's on here earlier this year thank you) but havent read many good scholarly articles on the topic that really dig deep into the passage.

I think it should be looked at from both, Matt. 19:3-12 and 1 Cor. 7:10-16, also note where Paul says he speaks concerning a matter and where Paul says not I but the Lord speak.

Thankfully I have not been in this position and I can not honestly say what I would do if I were.

I do find it interesting that Matt. 19:9 is quoted also in Luke 16 relative to the kingdom of God being preached and is immediately followed by the the rich man and Lazarus, passage.

I would love a good explanation of what that verse has to do with the kingdom of God relative to the following passage.

 

[zrs6v4]

I think it should be looked at from both, Matt. 19:3-12 and 1 Cor. 7:10-16, also note where Paul says he speaks concerning a matter and where Paul says not I but the Lord speak.

Thankfully I have not been in this position and I can not honestly say what I would do if I were.

I do find it interesting that Matt. 19:9 is quoted also in Luke 16 relative to the kingdom of God being preached and is immediately followed by the the rich man and Lazarus, passage.

I would love a good explanation of what that verse has to do with the kingdom of God relative to the following passage.

thanks for noting the passages above that do need to be studied with Mathew 5. I dont recall mentioning them, but they need to be examined as well.

 

[salzer mtn]

I have a question. Do you think the scriptures on marriage applies to the un-saved ? Sinners sin, that is their lifestyle. Only the Christian is required to live according to scriptures. One more thing. If two become one flesh by consummating their marriage, are the unmarried fornicators married in the sight of God ?

 

[DHK]

I have a question. Do you think the scriptures on marriage applies to the un-saved ? Sinners sin, that is their lifestyle. Only the Christian is required to live according to scriptures. One more thing. If two become one flesh by consummating their marriage, are the unmarried fornicators married in the sight of God ?

Scriptures, to some degree, are always binding on unbelievers, as well.
They have "the law" written in their hearts.
We also have a justice system based on the law written in the Bible.
There was a time in our nation when adultery was a crime that was punishable. Divorce used to be much more difficult to get.

Marriage is the exchange of vows between two individuals before God and before man. Culture has much to do with it. Notice how Jacob loved Rachel. Even though he was deceived into marrying Leah, both marriages were very public and were done according to the laws of the land and culture entered into it. It is public. It shows to all that you are one flesh; your intent to be married (not just living together).

I have an unsaved relative that "lived together" in a common law relationship for several years and from that relationship came four children. A couple years after the last child they decided to solemnize their relationship in a legal ceremony for the sake of the children. It was a good decision.

 

[Yeshua1]

I have a question. Do you think the scriptures on marriage applies to the un-saved ? Sinners sin, that is their lifestyle. Only the Christian is required to live according to scriptures. One more thing. If two become one flesh by consummating their marriage, are the unmarried fornicators married in the sight of God ?

Would say that God views on marriage would be that even unsaved need to do what is seenaand accepted as being "legal" in order to have God honor that union...