-
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!
The Biblical Doctrine of Divorce
- Thread starter ReformedBaptist
- Start date
- Status
Steven2006
New Member
DHK said:
I apologize, I guess I have not been able to express myself clearly as to what I meant.
DHK said:
No kidding. I never said there was, so please do not put words or extra meanings to what I have posted. You and Shane brought up that passage anyway and I clearly stated Romans 11 speaks about the remnant. So please do not insult me about not rightly dividing the word regarding Romans 11. That is twice you have insulted me on this thread and there is no need for insults or denigration towards me.
Agreed, that's what I said, the remnant refers to Judah.
What part of "at this present time" do you not understand?
Nope, I agree with all of that. Eschatology is not the subject. And you and I (DHK) probably agree as close as any on this board about eschatology. So that is a bunny trail you are trying to lead me down, not the topic at hand.
Why do you refuse to admit that God did indeed divorce Israel which Scripture says clearly in the verses I have already mentioned. That God will one day restore Israel (all of Israel, the 12 tribes) is not the issue, we agree on that. But between being married to Israel (all of Israel) and the restoration of Israel, is the DIVORCE.
I am glad to see we agree on some things.LadyEagle said:
Please remember that God allowed divorce in the OT, not because it was His will, but for the hardness of Israel's heart. He uses many anthropormorphic illustrations to get the message across to Israel. He tells Hosea to marry a harlot. He commands Isaiah to walk across the land naked. He tells Ephraim that he is a silly dove, and a cake not turned. The Bible is very descriptive.
The Lord doesn't go against His own Word or His own nature. Divorce is but a picture, just as the other pictures he gives. In the Book of Hosea Israel was described as adulterous because she was trying to worship Baal and Jehovah at the same time. Throughout the book Hosea (the Lord) calls Israel back to repentance.
Ultimately Israel will be restored during the MK. It isn't a divorce as such. Israel is "set apart" for a season. God is not done with Israel. Divorce is often looked upon as a permanent separation. That isn't the case here.
am glad to see we agree on some things.
Please remember that God allowed divorce in the OT, not because it was His will, but for the hardness of Israel's heart. He uses many anthropormorphic illustrations to get the message across to Israel. He tells Hosea to marry a harlot. He commands Isaiah to walk across the land naked. He tells Ephraim that he is a silly dove, and a cake not turned. The Bible is very descriptive.
The Lord doesn't go against His own Word or His own nature. Divorce is but a picture, just as the other pictures he gives. In the Book of Hosea Israel was described as adulterous because she was trying to worship Baal and Jehovah at the same time. Throughout the book Hosea (the Lord) calls Israel back to repentance.
Ultimately Israel will be restored during the MK. It isn't a divorce as such. Israel is "set apart" for a season. God is not done with Israel. Divorce is often looked upon as a permanent separation. That isn't the case here.
Agreed. :wavey:
Brother Bob
New Member
Rom 9:6 ¶ Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel:
Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Rom 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Rom 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
The Gentile had to be grafted in to something! Maybe thin air?
What will be shall be!!
BBob,
Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Rom 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Rom 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
The Gentile had to be grafted in to something! Maybe thin air?
What will be shall be!!
BBob,
Last edited by a moderator:
Steven2006 said:
Alright.
But just because one is not going into the ministry means he is exempt from God's frowning on and disapproving divorce.
Bear in mind that we are talking of divorces AFTER one joins the church, and of being fully aware of that church's position on divorce.
This does not include those who out of all innocency in the matter divorced their spouses or were divorced by their spouses BEFORE joining the church.
That cannot be, as you said, held over their heads, and it will be just as wrong because sin is sin whether divorce, theft, or adultery is in question.
However, one who is divorced and has not remarried would do well to stay unmarried because remarriage in that case is called adultery.
Finally, if we all agree that the church is the Lord's bride, and sin is spiritual adultery and that we do sin everyday then we might as well forget about eternal security.
Magnetic Poles
New Member
Yep, in many churches, divorce is the unforgivable sin.Brother Bob said:
Brother Bob
New Member
CuteMagnetic Poles said:
Not what I said, there are qualifications for the ministry. Seems to me to be a lot better than not letting them in at all.
BBob,
Magnetic Poles
New Member
How gracious of you.Brother Bob said:
Brother Bob
New Member
How sarcastic of you!Magnetic Poles said:
Do you believe in woman preachers and Bishops??
BBob,
Last edited by a moderator:
LadyEagle said:
Good points
!To the crowd who feels divorce is sin, I wonder how they reconcille this verse:
1 Cor 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency
The Lord would not want us "obeying" this command if it causes our earthly tents to develop diseases. Consider this verse the Lord spoke to Nebuchadnezzar's prisoners...I believe the principal to be universal.
Jeremiah 29:11-12* For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope. 12 Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you.
Knowing that 1 Cor 7:5 will place an innocent spouse at risk for STD's and even a slow death of Aids, Cervical cancer etc...Are these spouses bound to 1 Cor 7:5?
I think not.
IMHO, misenterpreting 1 Cor 7:5 as an excuse to not do what is good is SIN. A person who knows they are risking STD's by being with their womanizing spouse or womanizing wife is sinning imho.
Jam 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin
We are not held accountable for anothers sin. We do not inherit another's sin, that is wrong. By obtaining an STD willingly, this is what we take part in. God wishes us to be accountable for our OWN sin.
Deut: 24:16 "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."
After some time has passed, reconcilliaton, and many STD tests, a married couple may be able to resume relations with some assurance the risk of catching an STD is lowered. Divorce is permissable partly/ fully due to the innocent Spouse weighing their risk of STD's and re-exposure to them if their spouse "backslides".
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob
New Member
Joe said:Good points
To the crowd who feels divorce is sin, I wonder how they reconcille this verse:
1 Cor 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency
The Lord would not want us "obeying" this command if it causes our earthly tents to develop diseases. Consider this verse the Lord spoke to Nebuchadnezzar's prisoners...I believe the principal to be universal.
Jeremiah 29:11-12* For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope. 12 Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you.
Knowing that 1 Cor 7:5 will place an innocent spouse at risk for STD's and even a slow death of Aids, Cervical cancer etc...Are these spouses bound to 1 Cor 7:5?
I think not.
IMHO, misenterpreting 1 Cor 7:5 as an excuse to not do what is good is SIN. A person who knows they are risking STD's by being with their womanizing spouse or womanizing wife is sinning imho.
Jam 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin
We are not held accountable for anothers sin. We do not inherit another's sin, that is wrong. By obtaining an STD willingly, this is what we take part in. God wishes us to be accountable for our OWN sin.
Deut: 24:16 "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."
After some time has passed, reconcilliaton, and many STD tests, a married couple may be able to resume relations with some assurance the risk of catching an STD is lowered. Divorce is permissable partly/ fully due to the innocent Spouse weighing their risk of STD's and re-exposure to them if their spouse "backslides".
1Corth: 7
1: Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2: Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3: Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
4: The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5: Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
Surely you do not believe this is saying that with consent, the wife or husband can fool around for a while.
It is saying with consent to refrain from sex to prayer and fasting and then come together again that Satan not tempt you for your incontinency. If you were having sex somewhere else, you would not be tempted. You would have went much farther than temptation.
BBob,
Again, for the crowd who feels ALL divorce is sin, how do they reconclile 1 Cor:7?
If a man can run around on his wife and divorce is sin, not an option for her, how do they reconcile this verse? They can't possibly think she will follow thru with "sharing" her husband with another woman. Even if they reconcille, shouldn't she protect her health for some months to come? STD's stay in the system for months, possibly a year or more. Most people who are infected don't know it yet can still infect another.
I believe this is one reason why divorce is permissable. There is no reason why a woman should be forced to reconcille with him, stay married, then have relations to obey 1 Cor 7 then end up with a life threatening STD disease.
If a man can run around on his wife and divorce is sin, not an option for her, how do they reconcile this verse? They can't possibly think she will follow thru with "sharing" her husband with another woman. Even if they reconcille, shouldn't she protect her health for some months to come? STD's stay in the system for months, possibly a year or more. Most people who are infected don't know it yet can still infect another.
I believe this is one reason why divorce is permissable. There is no reason why a woman should be forced to reconcille with him, stay married, then have relations to obey 1 Cor 7 then end up with a life threatening STD disease.
Last edited by a moderator:
Divorce is sin. Jesus taught it in Mark 10; Paul taught it in Romans 7, and it is also taught elsewhere in many other passages. Divorce is sin. Divorce is the breaking of a vow made before man and God. Divorce and remarriage is adultery.Joe said:
1 Corinthians 7:1-2 Now concerning the things about which you wrote to me: it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But, because of sexual immoralities, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. (WEB)
The Bible says nothing here abot STD's Aids or anything of the like. To use this Scripture to justify divorce for that reason is irrational and not rightly dividing the word of truth.
LadyEagle said:
Charles Stanley is a good motivational preacher (not of the Joel Osteen crowd type but way better), however, I don't thnk I've ever heard him preach on divorce. Have you ?
I hope he hasnt.
[no sarcasm]That'll be like a kleptomanic preaching against stealing.:laugh: [/no sarcasm]
"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."
Based on the passage in Matthew, (KJV "fornication") and the DHK/Shane refusal to budge on their stance, I posted this:
DHK, really, the examples I posted all had to do with sexual impurity based on the Greek word "pornea" translated "fornication" in the KJV in Matthew 19:9.
Your response has nothing to do with sexual impurity (pornea):
So your response is like comparing apples to oranges.
Our side of this debate is based on the original Greek used in Scripture, not a case based on self-pity and pride, as you accuse.
Do we need to explore the Greek word pornea a bit further to shed light on what Jesus said in Matthew (this thread is so long I can't remember if anyone posted this) and I know you and Shane know this already, BTW?
Now, what do you respond to those apples? :laugh:
Really? What about a person married to a pedophile? In what way is the spouse not innocent? Are you saying the non-pedophile spouse drove the pedophile to molest children or caused the pedophile to molest children? Please explain.
Based on the passage in Matthew, (KJV "fornication") and the DHK/Shane refusal to budge on their stance, I posted this:
LadyEagle said:
DHK, really, the examples I posted all had to do with sexual impurity based on the Greek word "pornea" translated "fornication" in the KJV in Matthew 19:9.
Your response has nothing to do with sexual impurity (pornea):
DHK said:
So your response is like comparing apples to oranges.
Our side of this debate is based on the original Greek used in Scripture, not a case based on self-pity and pride, as you accuse.
Do we need to explore the Greek word pornea a bit further to shed light on what Jesus said in Matthew (this thread is so long I can't remember if anyone posted this) and I know you and Shane know this already, BTW?
Now, what do you respond to those apples? :laugh:
Really? What about a person married to a pedophile? In what way is the spouse not innocent? Are you saying the non-pedophile spouse drove the pedophile to molest children or caused the pedophile to molest children? Please explain.
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh, and also, I don't know if anyone brought up this passage yet:
Deut.24
[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.
So according to this passage, the remarriage of a woman to her first husband after marrying another is an abomination. Your take on that, please.
Deut.24
[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.
So according to this passage, the remarriage of a woman to her first husband after marrying another is an abomination. Your take on that, please.
- Status