Divorce and Remarriage

[farout]

I don't believe in remarriage. Once divorced you only have a few options. Wait for that person to pass away, then your free to marry. Remarry them. Or stay single.

Also this topic is from 2014.

Perhaps you need to change you name, to nothingisimpossiblebutremarraigeforthedivorced you need to spend a lot of time digging very deeply into the Word. What would you do with someone who remarried and had children? Use Scripture to back your statement.

 

[Johnnz]

Yes, I agree on divorce in extreme situations. But remarriage is rock solid at odds with Scripture ( in my opinion ).
1Cor 7:10-11.
But I believe God can heal any relationship, but if things come to divorce and one or both remarry, the door to restoration is closed.

I question the 'rock solid' position you hold to. Why?
a) Remarriage was permitted after a divorce in OT and ancient times in general. Once a marriage was ended a person was free to remarry. For a woman that was a critical factor for her ongoing support.
b) The stated biblical allowances for a divorce allow for remarriage.
c) What justice is there in one person walking away their marriage and leaving the innocent party having to remain forever single when neither ending the marriage nor being forever single and celibate was ever in view.
d) Paul's advice for widows to remarry if their sex drive was an issue reinforces c) and also points to remarriage being permitted within the church.
e) In the case of harmful abuse, where one party suffers, we cannot assume some final repentance/restoration will happen. Hell exists because some people won't ever change.

Simplistic views and more complex situations are not a good mix in my opinion.

John
NZ

 

[Grafted In]

I question the 'rock solid' position you hold to. Why?
a) Remarriage was permitted after a divorce in OT and ancient times in general. Once a marriage was ended a person was free to remarry. For a woman that was a critical factor for her ongoing support.
b) The stated biblical allowances for a divorce allow for remarriage.
c) What justice is there in one person walking away their marriage and leaving the innocent party having to remain forever single when neither ending the marriage nor being forever single and celibate was ever in view.
d) Paul's advice for widows to remarry if their sex drive was an issue reinforces c) and also points to remarriage being permitted within the church.
e) In the case of harmful abuse, where one party suffers, we cannot assume some final repentance/restoration will happen. Hell exists because some people won't ever change.

Simplistic views and more complex situations are not a good mix in my opinion.

John
NZ

Well, this isn't the first time I've been referred to as simple, so I'll simply repost a verse I posted earlier on this thread. It's pretty simple and to the point: 1Cor. 7:10-11.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Perhaps you need to change you name, to nothingisimpossiblebutremarraigeforthedivorced you need to spend a lot of time digging very deeply into the Word. What would you do with someone who remarried and had children? Use Scripture to back your statement.

How would having children change my statement? It would remain the same. Unless a spouse passes away, you are married until day, even if legally you are divorced.

 

[actionsub]

Usually when verse are cherry picked, the person doesn't take the context of whats around the verse. Best example is divorce because of cheating. I can't recall which verse it was but the story was about how men kept coming to one of the apostles every day and would bring up a reason why they wanted to divorce their wife. The next day they came back with a new reason. He kept telling them no. Finally they came back again and said something about the woman was cheating and he gave in and said you can divorce. Now people are like "See, he said cheating is cause for divorce!".

I don't know where you heard that story, but it's NOT in the Bible.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Yes it is. Now even if you want to debate it, it still says anyways "Let no one separate", which means no divorce. And it also says anyone who divorces and remarries commits adultery. Even Jesus said "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.” “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,”. As in mans will say anything to do what they want, in this case divorce. Which is why Moses says what he did. Clearly though Jesus us also saying you shouldn't divorce. There are other verse besides the below one that say things like God hates divorce. So its why I don't argue with anyone because the bible makes it clear divorce is not allowed. But many will just cherry pick a very specific verse such as Mark 4 instead of reading the whole thing in context.

Sort of like how many cherry pick verses that say you pray and get healed. But they don't take the rest of it into context.

Mark 10:2-12

2 Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” 3 “What did Moses command you?” he replied. 4 They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.” 5 “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied. 6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

 

[TheDag]

I believe you are mistaken. Scripture can be twisted to make remarriage ok, but I have done a lot of seaching for justifying remarriage and found none.
That having been said, people are going to do as they please and no amount of biblical truth is going to stop them. They will cling to a verse here and there to justify their actions, and there is more than ample support by other Christians to ease their feelings of guilt.

divorce and remarriage and not interchangeable words. You need to stop using them as if they are. If you don't believe that you have done that then this reply makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

[Grafted In]

divorce and remarriage and not interchangeable words. You need to stop using them as if they are. If you don't believe that you have done that then this reply makes absolutely no sense at all.

And you need to stop pointing your finger at me and re-read what I've written.

 

[TheDag]

And you need to stop pointing your finger at me and re-read what I've written.

it was said there was justification in the bible for divorce.
you replied by saying it is not the best option (reconciliation being best)
reply was that there was still justification in the bible for divorce
you then started going on about how people will try and justify remarriage but they are wrong.
If that last bit was not related to the posts about if divorce is allowed in certain situations in the bible then you should not have quoted the posts talking about that. Just make a new post without quoting and it will save the confusion.

 

[GraceDriven]

Marriage is not worth it anyway.

 

[Grafted In]

it was said there was justification in the bible for divorce.
you replied by saying it is not the best option (reconciliation being best)
reply was that there was still justification in the bible for divorce
you then started going on about how people will try and justify remarriage but they are wrong.
If that last bit was not related to the posts about if divorce is allowed in certain situations in the bible then you should not have quoted the posts talking about that. Just make a new post without quoting and it will save the confusion.

First of all, Thedag, I am sorry for snapping at you. When someone starts a comment with "You need to" I take it as condescension. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt on that.

I do not see how my post lead you to think I was confusing the issue. The thread is titled "Divorce and remarriage". Please explain why you think I was considering the 2 as being the same.

 

[Grafted In]

TheDag, you have misinterpreted my post.
One can get a divorce and leave, but in God's eyes you are still married. If you then remarry the door to reconciliation is shut.

"But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to herhusband: and let not the husband put away his wife." 1Cor 7:11. KJV

Please explain to me how you determined that I was using the 2 interchangeably.

If you had a valid reason to admonish me as you did, we could reason with one another. But in this case I think you are confused about why I wrote what I did.

 

[TheDag]

First of all, Thedag, I am sorry for snapping at you. When someone starts a comment with "You need to" I take it as condescension. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt on that.

I do not see how my post lead you to think I was confusing the issue. The thread is titled "Divorce and remarriage". Please explain why you think I was considering the 2 as being the same.

I already have. You stated there was no biblical grounds for divorce but there clearly is. Sure it is not the ideal. You then in response to a person posting a verse started talking about remarriage as if that answered the verse. There is no way it does answer the verse posted. If you had said something like 'Oops sorry I meant there is no grounds for remarriage then that would be different.
Yes the thread is called divorce and remarriage. They are two different things. So just because that is the name of the thread does not mean when someone says divorce they are talking about remarriage.

So lets go through this post by post.
In post #81 Johnnz makes a statement on divorce only.
In post #84 you respond saying there is no grounds for divorce.
In post #85 Johnnz quotes scripture that clearly states there is.
That is the post I quoted #93. My statement was that it does not change the fact that justification is still there.
You then respond talking about remarriage which is not mentioned in those previous posts. The moment you started claiming others were wrong because remarriage is not justified is when you started using the terms interchangeably.

 

[Grafted In]

May I ask if anyone else besides TheDag thinks my posts on this thread use the terms divorce and remarriage interchangeably. I do not understand his problem with what I've written and his responces to my requests for clarification are not making any sense to me.

TheDag, I ask that you please not respond to this post. I am looking for the opinions of others. I already know you're position.

 

[magicaxeman]

Mathew 5 - 31 & 32

This is part of the sermon on the mount, so Christ's own words.

It hath been said that whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement.
But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:
and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

It leaves me slightly confused and in a quandary as one day I too would like to remarry.

 

[Johnnz]

Mathew 5 - 31 & 32

This is part of the sermon on the mount, so Christ's own words.

It hath been said that whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement.
But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:
and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

It leaves me slightly confused and in a quandary as one day I too would like to remarry.

Those verses have a context.

a) Jesus was addressing a Jewish audience. His teaching was in reference to a particular interpretation of the Mosaic allowance by a school of rabbinic teaching.

b) One school held to a fairly restrictive view of divorce. The other school took a very liberal view and allowed for divorce on almost any grounds.

c) Jesus took issue with the liberal view telling them that their 'easy-divorce', in spite of what they believed, was invalid before God. Hence any subsequent remarriage was adultery.

d) Remarriage was always permitted after a legal divorce on adequate grounds. Jesus did not upset that, but He did oppose the spurious grounds for divorce sanctioned by some teachings.

John
NZ

 

[RDKirk]

There are biblical grounds for divorce when one is an unbeliever.

John
NZ

Not practicably. For a Christian, the only grounds for divorce is abandonment by the unbelieving spouse...and in that case, divorce is merely legal certification of what has already occurred without the desire or design of the Christian partner.

 

[RDKirk]

I submit your idea of "perfect" is some kind of computer program which has no feelings for true human suffering. The bible is full of stories that contradict that view point.

God is a PERSON, not a rules-based decision program. As a person, have you never come up to a situation where you had to go with some untenable course of action only because the alternatives were worse? God also hates killing; and yet he had to wipe out all of the entire human race (hundreds of thousands, millions?) except for 8 individuals. (Noah and family)

God allows for that which He may hate, if the alternatives are worse. That is no contradiction.

In fact God said HE HIMSELF went thru a divorce:

Jeremiah 3:8 And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce, yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also.

But even the divorce leads to unacceptable alternatives for the party pressing the matter.

Divorce by God's law provided a means of relief to the abused party, and he permitted it only because of the offense caused to the abused party: "Moses permitted divorce because your hearts were hard."

I'd point out here that Jesus specified "Moses permitted" as a direct reference to the Mosaic Law and not God's (His) actual feelings about divorce. In other words, Jesus was saying that the Mosaic Law was not the end of what God (He) had so say about divorce.

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, I agree on divorce in extreme situations. But remarriage is rock solid at odds with Scripture ( in my opinion ).
1Cor 7:10-11.
But I believe God can heal any relationship, but if things come to divorce and one or both remarry, the door to restoration is closed.

I think we are probably too liberal about calling people "believers" who nevertheless desire divorce rather than reconciliation; I don't think such people actually are believers.

As I say that, I would ask persons who seek divorce because of abuse: What is your greatest desire? Would you ideally prefer full reconciliation with a spouse who consistently and fully loved you and treated you with love? If the answer to that question is, "Yes," then that's not a person who "desires" divorce, but merely doesn't believe reconciliation with that spouse is possible...and that might be true.

I don't think (and it's my experience) that God will heal a relationship unless both parties are willing to submit to Him, which is why Paul said of an unbelieving spouse, "If he wants to leave, let him leave. The brother or sister is not bound in that case."

 

[RDKirk]

Mathew 5 - 31 & 32

This is part of the sermon on the mount, so Christ's own words.

It hath been said that whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement.
But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:
and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

It leaves me slightly confused and in a quandary as one day I too would like to remarry.

I think Jesus is giving us a "total righteousness" context, which is greater than the limited righteousness context of the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law is written in the context of "their hearts were hard." The Sermon on the Mount is spoken in the context of perfect Heaven-level righteousness.

In that context, all divorces occur within a cloud of unrighteousness and sin. This obviates the Mosaic Law implication that any divorce can occur within a context of total righteousness.

The question is: Who is held responsible for it?

Wait, quick question: When Jesus said "...saving for cause of fornication" did that include the woman caught in adultery if we presume she repented, went back to her husband, and intended to "sin no more?" If so, doesn't God's willingness to accept Israel back after all of her fornication an example of what Jesus expected of that husband? Isn't Hosea an example of what God expects?

So I'm going to conclude that ""...saving for cause of fornication" means someone who has left the marriage with no intention of returning, and certainly not someone who has already honestly repented and wants to return to the marriage.

So in every divorced we have the case that either the offending person refuses to repent or the offended person refuses to forgive--either being a sin, and Jesus clearly understands this fact when He says "...causes her to commit adultery." He knows who is ultimately at blame in this unrighteous situation.