The Bible's Laws on Divorce and Remarriage.

[YeshuaFan]

This is not true.
“For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 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 7:2–3) (KJV 1900)

So you have NO divorced and or remarried people at all in your Church then?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I love what you have provided.

My point is still when we are tempted, and fall to that temptation, we do it willingly during the moment of temptation. We can say no, but we many times forget that little 2 letter word. And once we have fallen to temptation and sinned, Grace does not save us unless we confess that sin. And that is not a Grace period between sinning and confessing, that is God's Mercy bestowed upon us.

Thank you, I think every single commentary I quoted was written by Calvinists. Obviously anyone who holds to a doctrine of apostasy cannot hold to a notion of "licence to sin" at the same time. It is a gross misunderstanding of Calvinism, and the doctrine of sin. "Grace does not save us unless..."? What is grace but the unmerited favor of God? Conditional grace is not grace, it is merited by a work of complying. Oh be it not so with God, if I should sin one minute and die the next, may God have mercy and the blood of Jesus Christ be sufficient and efficient for all of my sins, may the righteousness of Christ be applied to me through the work of Christ in the atonement. May God be faithful to His word and effectual calling, and to His free will choices before the foundation of the world.

 

[YeshuaFan]

Thank you, I think every single commentary I quoted was written by Calvinists. Obviously anyone who holds to a doctrine of apostasy cannot hold to a notion of "licence to sin" at the same time. It is a gross misunderstanding of Calvinism, and the doctrine of sin. "Grace does not save us unless..."? What is grace but the unmerited favor of God? Conditional grace is not grace, it is merited by a work of complying. Oh be it not so with God, if I should sin one minute and die the next, may God have mercy and the blood of Jesus Christ be sufficient and efficient for all of my sins, may the righteousness of Christ be applied to me through the work of Christ in the atonement. May God be faithful to His word and effectual calling, and to His free will choices before the foundation of the world.

Calvinism produced the so called Lordship salvation of a John Macarthur, so how can it be said that we hold to a license to now keep on sinning?

 

[Dave L]

So you have NO divorced and or remarried people at all in your Church then?

I don't attend churches that allow it. It's a sure sign they are off in other areas too.

 

[Dave L]

Jesus stated that God allowed for the breaking of the relationship due to adultery, correct?

Yes, we can separate but we remain married for life. And divorce = unforgiveness on the part of the seeker which is a damnable sin.

 

[Dave L]

Jesus and Paul gave the out for adultery as breaking the Covenant of marriage in eyes of God!

Which is death.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Calvinism produced the so called Lordship salvation of a John Macarthur, so how can it be said that we hold to a license to now keep on sinning?

Let's just assume the first part of your statement which isn't part of the question. Next let's just forget about what all the other theologies have "produced" (and there are many products). Next never mind that Johnny MaC was born several hundred years after John Calvin. Finally, no Calvinist has ever claimed we have a license to continue sinning, no published Calvinist with credentials has, and I challenge you to find one. Oh, you say it is implied in the doctrines of grace? No it is not, the sovereignty of God in salvation is implied, and I recommend reading the Calvinist Puritans, any idea why the name "Puritan" was intended as an insult in the times of the Puritans?

"In the 17th century, the word Puritan was a term applied to not just one group but many. There continues to be debate among historians over the definition of Puritanism.[6] Historically, the word Puritan was considered a pejorative term that characterized Protestant groups as extremists. According to Thomas Fuller in his Church History, the term dates to 1564. Archbishop Matthew Parker of that time used it and precisian with the sense of the modern stickler.[7] Puritans, then, were distinguished for being "more intensely protestant than their protestant neighbors or even the Church of England".[8] - Wikipedia​

 

[Gr8Grace]

Yes, we can separate but we remain married for life. And divorce = unforgiveness on the part of the seeker which is a damnable sin.

Why not provide a verse that declares divorce=unforgiveness?
And provide a verse that says unforgiveness is damnable. And don't give me the fellowship verses.

Solid, clear verses that unforgiveness is damnable, can't be saved,not really saved, can't be justified,not really justified. You know, clear verses that unambiguously show that unforgiveness is damnable.

 

[RDKirk]

Why not provide a verse that declares divorce=unforgiveness?
And provide a verse that says unforgiveness is damnable. And don't give me the fellowship verses.

Solid, clear verses that unforgiveness is damnable, can't be saved,not really saved, can't be justified,not really justified. You know, clear verses that unambiguously show that unforgiveness is damnable.

Well, verses that say unforgivness is damnable are available, such as the parable of the unforgiving steward and the Lord's Prayer itself.

What you can't find is a verse that says a woman abandoned and unjustly divorced by her husband is necessarily being unforgiving if she remarries.

 

[paul becke]

But in those days, adultery was punishable by stoning, so what would they have understood his words to mean?
The woman who was caught in adultery, they didn't say to her husband, "well we have proof of her unfaithfulness, we will allow your divorce"; they dragged her out to stone her to death. If any other man had accused his wife of adultery and had proof, she would have suffered the same fate.
Until the angel appeared to Joseph, he was going to divorce Mary because he did not want her to be disgraced when it was known that she was pregnant, Matthew 1:19.
Because they understood that adultery was punishable by death, I am certain they would have understood Jesus' words to mean that divorce is not good at all. And he said this, because they commented that Moses had allowed men to write their wives a note of divorce - treating it casually; ending a marriage, and dismissing their wives, by leaving a note on the table. It should not be like this, Jesus said - God made men and women in the beginning, put them together and intended for them to be one flesh.
He is telling the men to treat marriage seriously and not as if their wives are property to be discarded when they wish.



Maybe.
What if a couple divorce, live apart and neither remarry though?



The thing is that the Bible doesn't address some of the scenarios we can have today, so what are we to do, or say, in those situations?
What of violence within a marriage?
What if one half of the couple starts using drugs or alcohol - and gets them into debt to pay for their habit?
What if one, or both, people have made vows before God but don't actually believe in him or mean them?
What if one turns to another faith and rejects God?
What if a man walks out on his wife for his mistress, and 5 years later wants a divorce, which (in the UK at least) he could do without her consent? Does the woman have to remain single, never look for, or enter into, a loving relationship again because of something that was not her doing or her will?

Do we tell people that God expects them to endure violence, rape, bad treatment, broken vows, debt etc forever, because they made a mistake and married someone who was, or became, the wrong person? How does that speak of a God who IS love? How does that encourage people to want to know, and worship, him?
We can't say what the Bible teaches in these scenarios, because it doesn't.

 

[paul becke]

But in those days, adultery was punishable by stoning, so what would they have understood his words to mean?
The woman who was caught in adultery, they didn't say to her husband, "well we have proof of her unfaithfulness, we will allow your divorce"; they dragged her out to stone her to death. If any other man had accused his wife of adultery and had proof, she would have suffered the same fate.
Until the angel appeared to Joseph, he was going to divorce Mary because he did not want her to be disgraced when it was known that she was pregnant, Matthew 1:19.
Because they understood that adultery was punishable by death, I am certain they would have understood Jesus' words to mean that divorce is not good at all. And he said this, because they commented that Moses had allowed men to write their wives a note of divorce - treating it casually; ending a marriage, and dismissing their wives, by leaving a note on the table. It should not be like this, Jesus said - God made men and women in the beginning, put them together and intended for them to be one flesh.
He is telling the men to treat marriage seriously and not as if their wives are property to be discarded when they wish.



Maybe.
What if a couple divorce, live apart and neither remarry though?



The thing is that the Bible doesn't address some of the scenarios we can have today, so what are we to do, or say, in those situations?
What of violence within a marriage?
What if one half of the couple starts using drugs or alcohol - and gets them into debt to pay for their habit?
What if one, or both, people have made vows before God but don't actually believe in him or mean them?
What if one turns to another faith and rejects God?
What if a man walks out on his wife for his mistress, and 5 years later wants a divorce, which (in the UK at least) he could do without her consent? Does the woman have to remain single, never look for, or enter into, a loving relationship again because of something that was not her doing or her will?

Do we tell people that God expects them to endure violence, rape, bad treatment, broken vows, debt etc forever, because they made a mistake and married someone who was, or became, the wrong person? How does that speak of a God who IS love? How does that encourage people to want to know, and worship, him?
We can't say what the Bible teaches in these scenarios, because it doesn't.

Interesting and persuasive post.

 

[paul becke]

This is an odd view to have coming from a Catholic. Catholics believe in faith + works as a part of salvation. Granted, I do not believe in Catholicism, it is just that your view of Soteriology is not in line with them (Unless there is a liberal branch of Catholicism I am unaware of).

Well, you are at odds with Paul, who lamented the Jews' self-reliance and effective rejection of God's savin g grace, won for us via his crucfixion. We must try, but we cannot be perfect in this life. Nothing to do with a rejection of works - far from it.

 

[Gr8Grace]

Well, verses that say unforgivness is damnable are available, such as the parable of the unforgiving steward and the Lord's Prayer itself.

Gr8Grace said: ↑
And don't give me the fellowship verses.

Solid, clear verses that unforgiveness is damnable, can't be saved,not really saved, can't be justified,not really justified. You know, clear verses that unambiguously show that unforgiveness is damnable.

 

[RDKirk]

Gr8Grace said: ↑
And don't give me the fellowship verses.

Solid, clear verses that unforgiveness is damnable, can't be saved,not really saved, can't be justified,not really justified. You know, clear verses that unambiguously show that unforgiveness is damnable.

I'll point you to Matthew, 18:23-35 so you can read how deadly serious Jesus is about forgiveness.

Clearly you've been triggered by something more than I said, but I'm not going there with you because that's not the topic.

My point was that divorce isn't necessarily an indication that someone is refusing to forgive.

 

[Gr8Grace]

I'll point you to Matthew, 18:23-35 so you can read how deadly serious Jesus is about forgiveness.

Again......Nothing about damnable,loss of salvation,not really saved, not justified, not really justified,loss of eternal life,being unsealed,not really sealed, sheep going to goat status again,not really a sheep....ect.

What is very clear is John 10:28. His sheep are given eternal life and will NEVER perish.

Clearly you've been triggered by something more than I said

No. I was responding to EXACTLY what you said.......Give us a verse that clearly shows us that unforgiveness is damnable. You can't.

 

[Vi]

What first came to mind when I read what was written in this post was that either Moses, the Jewish faithful or the early church was given the authority to determine what is acceptable abt divorce... They determined (evil) man could not follow God's rule of never divorcing, so divorce guidlines were established by men who had God's authority.

The second thing that comes to mind is that man is incapable of a sinless life, otherwise we would not need a savior.

And then finally I recall that if being married to someone unXian, or that gets in the way of your following Christ, someone that interferes with yr walk with the Lord, it is better to not be married to that person.


I recall a story I heard abt Mohammed. He was talking with Moses and said he was going to require men pray 100 times a day. Moses said that he personally knew the hearts of men and that they would never pray 100 times a day. Mohammed kept backing down on the number until he came to 5 or 10. He wouldn't budge even when a Moses said men won't pray even that often. I guess my point is that I keep reading what seems like Xians trying to use their own self discipline to follow the laws and to be perfect. The question posed to us might be another one of those things stubborn man doesn't do. God doesn't want divorce.... Man divorces anyway. God hates sin, man sins anyway. Our best efforts are as filthy rags.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What first came to mind when I read what was written in this post was that either Moses, the Jewish faithful or the early church was given the authority to determine what is acceptable abt divorce... They determined (evil) man could not follow God's rule of never divorcing, so divorce guidlines were established by men who had God's authority.

The second thing that comes to mind is that man is incapable of a sinless life, otherwise we would not need a savior.

And then finally I recall that if being married to someone unXian, or that gets in the way of your following Christ, someone that interferes with yr walk with the Lord, it is better to not be married to that person.


I recall a story I heard abt Mohammed. He was talking with Moses and said he was going to require men pray 100 times a day. Moses said that he personally knew the hearts of men and that they would never pray 100 times a day. Mohammed kept backing down on the number until he came to 5 or 10. He wouldn't budge even when a Moses said men won't pray even that often. I guess my point is that I keep reading what seems like Xians trying to use their own self discipline to follow the laws and to be perfect. The question posed to us might be another one of those things stubborn man doesn't do. God doesn't want divorce.... Man divorces anyway. God hates sin, man sins anyway. Our best efforts are as filthy rags.

God can transform a person's heart and give them new desires. God can help a believer to do the right thing and to walk uprightly. On our own, of course, our best efforts alone without God or in doing our own thing are filthy rags. Conforming to His Word (the Bible) and asking God for help with that is always the best course of action. It is not maybe we can do such a thing. For with God, all things are possible.

 

[Dave L]

Why not provide a verse that declares divorce=unforgiveness?
And provide a verse that says unforgiveness is damnable. And don't give me the fellowship verses.

Solid, clear verses that unforgiveness is damnable, can't be saved,not really saved, can't be justified,not really justified. You know, clear verses that unambiguously show that unforgiveness is damnable.

“For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” (Matthew 6:14–15) (KJV 1900)

“And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.” (Matthew 18:34–35) (KJV 1900)

 

[Vicomte13]

= adultery.

Correct. If the unsaved wife departs and the husband remarries, both he and his new wife are committing adultery according to what Jesus said. Absolutely true.

 

[Strong in Him]

How is a husband who was walked out on - not his will or doing - committing adultery if he marries again?
Especially if the marriage was legally ended and his official status is 'divorced'?