The Bible's Laws on Divorce and Remarriage.

[Lost4words]

I know quite a few divorced Catholics, and other denominations.

I cant see how some people 'have' to stay together when it is extremely obvious that they cannot.

 

[Lost4words]

I just dont have the same belief as you in this area..

I agree. I am sure God allows exceptions.

 

[Lost4words]

Worst of all, what if you were married to Trump!!!!

 

[Undenied]

Jesus & the apostles taught from the books of the Bible that we call the “Old Testament”.

When i read Mark 10:2-12, i always remember Malachi 2, specifically the verses 13 to 16. (Malachi 2:13-16). I don't get why so many Christians avoid the "Old Testament".

 

[Hazelelponi]

I agree. I am sure God allows exceptions.

I think the exceptions are rare. And the matters never trivial.. I'm angry, bored or frustrated is never a good reason.

Some people just need separate rooms.

 

[Dave L]

I just dont have the same belief as you in this area..

Paul says if an unbeliever departs, we are their slaves (bound). But remarriage is off the table.

 

[Brightmoon]

Jason0047, I agree with you. I just add that in some cases, like domestic violence, substance abuse, etc., it is safer to be separated, but always working on healing, always being supportive and loyal.

Obviously you’ve never dealt with a control freak abuser. That old movie Sleeping With the Enemy , husband’s behavior is highly exaggerated but not untrue

 

[Lost4words]

If i were married and then got divorced i would not re marry because of my beliefs. Divorce, yes. Re marry, no.

 

[Basil the Great]

I commend the OP for raising this thread, even though it is a very disturbing subject, if we are to be honest and take Jesus' words at face value. It is partly because of the divorce issue that I contend that no Christian body today lives 100% like the Early Church probably did. Now, my guess is that Jesus did not include spousal abuse as a valid reason for divorce, because back then and all the way through the 1700's and probably part of the 1800's, a wife was considered to be the property of her husband and it was no doubt thought of as permissible for a man to physically discipline his wife. If Jesus would have told the crowds that was wrong for a husband to hit a wife, they would have laughed at him and maybe even worse.

 

[brinny]

Worst of all, what if you were married to Trump!!!!

LOL! Awwww c'mon.....we were doing soooo well....

 

[brinny]

I commend the OP for raising this thread, even though it is a very disturbing subject, if we are to be honest and take Jesus' words at face value. It is partly because of the divorce issue that I contend that no Christian body today lives 100% like the Early Church probably did. Now, my guess is that Jesus did not include spousal abuse as a valid reason for divorce, because back then and all the way through the 1700's and probably part of the 1800's, a wife was considered to be the property of her husband and it was no doubt thought of as permissible for a man to physically discipline his wife. If Jesus would have told the crowds that was wrong for a husband to hit a wife, they would have laughed at him and maybe even worse.

Is it a sin to cause deliberate harm to a spouse and/or children?

 

[Undenied]

Obviously you’ve never dealt with a control freak abuser. That old movie Sleeping With the Enemy is highly exaggerated but not untrue

Why do you have to undermine my experience, by making assumptions that can lead you to false conclusions, just to make your point?

 

[RDKirk]

What about someone who is married to a violent wife beater?

First, unfaithfulness to the marriage covenant is not limited to sexual intercourse.

Second, it is possible to leave a marriage without leaving the house.

Third, just because a person calls himself a Christian doesn't mean he is one. If there is no Holy Spirit within him convicting him of such sin, he might not be a Christian.

 

[Basil the Great]

Is it a sin to cause deliberate harm to a spouse and/or children?

I would say it certainly is a sin to deliberately physically harm anyone, especially a family member, save in self defense. Having said that, no doubt some might claim that physical discipline does not necessarily = spousal abuse. I suppose that this is the case. However, it certainly borders on it and is no longer considered acceptable for a man to hit his wife, except I guess in the rare circumstance where a wife might be about to harm herself or others.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

I commend the OP for raising this thread, even though it is a very disturbing subject, if we are to be honest and take Jesus' words at face value. It is partly because of the divorce issue that I contend that no Christian body today lives 100% like the Early Church probably did. Now, my guess is that Jesus did not include spousal abuse as a valid reason for divorce, because back then and all the way through the 1700's and probably part of the 1800's, a wife was considered to be the property of her husband and it was no doubt thought of as permissible for a man to physically discipline his wife. If Jesus would have told the crowds that was wrong for a husband to hit a wife, they would have laughed at him and maybe even worse.

St. John Chrysostom explicitly stated that there no justification for striking your wife ever. Contrary to feminist mythology it has never been socially acceptable in Western culture.

 

[YeshuaFan]

Divorce and remarriage = adultery.

Blood of Jesus cleanses from ALL sins!

 

[brinny]

I would say it certainly is a sin to deliberately physically harm anyone, especially a family member, save in self defense. Having said that, no doubt some might claim that physical discipline does not necessarily = spousal abuse. I suppose that this is the case. However, it certainly borders on it and is no longer considered acceptable for a man to hit his wife, except I guess in the rare circumstance where a wife might be about to harm herself or others.

physical discipline does not necessarily = spousal abuse.

Physical discipline?

Would you care to elaborate?

 

[YeshuaFan]

There is no provision for divorce in the new covenant. All marriage religious or otherwise is permanent broken only by death.

So in a remarriage, God refuses to forgive and restore them, because their sin exceeds the power of the blood to cleanse from all sins?

 

[RDKirk]

Paul says if an unbeliever departs, we are their slaves (bound). But remarriage is off the table.

I don't think Paul says that.

There is no acceptable reason for a believer to desire a divorce. Paul says that.

But Paul places the situation of a believer married to an unbeliever in a different category with different instructions from a believer married to a believer. After saying, "To the married..." and giving them instructions based on Jesus' actual teaching (Matthew 19), he explicitly says, "To the rest..." and gives different instructions based on his own Holy Spirit inspiration to a situation Jesus never talked about: Believers married to unbelievers.

In that situation, if the unbeliever walks away, the believer is free to remarry...another believer. But even in that situation, the believer is not permitted to desire divorce. If the unbelieving spouse is happy to allow the believer to do his or her Christian thing with other Christians, the believing spouse has no acceptable reason to seek divorce.

When the unbelieving spouse leaves the marriage, Paul says the believing spouse is no longer "bound." Then later in the letter, he explains that by "bound" he is talking about remarriage.

 

[YeshuaFan]

Worst of all, what if you were married to Trump!!!!

Obama would be even worse, or Hilliary!