The Bible's Laws on Divorce and Remarriage.

[YeshuaFan]

I don't think Paul says that.

Divorce is off the table for believers. There is no acceptable reason for a believer to desire a divorce.

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 being able to remarry.

In a Christian marriage, would not one of the parties committing adultery and refuse to repent and forsake it cause the relationship to be ruptured then also?

 

[Lost4words]

I don't think Paul says that.

Divorce is off the table for believers. There is no acceptable reason for a believer to desire a divorce.

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.

I disagree. A believer who is getting beaten up daily to a pulp would definitely be in a position to accept / desire divorce .

 

[RDKirk]

In a Christian marriage, would not one of the parties committing adultery and refuse to repent and forsake it cause the relationship to be ruptured then also?

Frankly and bluntly, we would have to consider that spouse not to be a believer. So the third category applies.

 

[RDKirk]

I disagree. A believer who is getting beaten up daily to a pulp would definitely be in a position to accept / desire divorce .

Frankly and bluntly, we would have to consider the spouse of that person not to be a believer. So the third category applies. The believing spouse would not and should not desire divorce--ideally, the believing spouse would prefer repentance and reconciliation.

As I said earlier, "It's possible to leave the marriage without leaving the house."

In one former congregation of mine--Calvary Chapel of Honolulu under pastor Bill Stonebraker--the pastor had a special program called "House of Ruth" in which the Security Ministry would swoop in and remove that woman and her children from the house and take them to a confidential safe house.

Then a group of men including members of the Security Ministry would wait for that husband to return home and have a "wall to wall counseling session" with him.

"Who are you? Where is my wife?"
"Our dear sister is safe. And she's going to remain safe. But you and we are going to talk."

 

[Lost4words]

Frankly and bluntly, we would have to consider the spouse of that person not to be a believer. So the third category applies. The believing spouse would not and should not desire divorce--ideally, the believing spouse would prefer repentance and reconciliation.

As I said earlier, "It's possible to leave the marriage without leaving the house."

In one former congregation of mine--Calvary Chapel of Honolulu under pastor Bill Stonebraker--the pastor had a special program called "House of Ruth" in which the Security Ministry would swoop in and remove that woman and her children from the house and take them to a confidential safe house.

Then a group of men including members of the Security Ministry would wait for that husband to return home and have a "wall to wall counseling session" with him.

"Who are you? Where is my wife?"
"Our dear sister is safe. And she's going to remain safe. But you and we are going to talk."

Still disagree.

 

[Basil the Great]

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.

Thanks for your post. When I read about his words against Jews and synagogues some years back, I did not think very highly of him. However, when I did some research about Church Fathers and spousal abuse, it was his sermon on the subject that I found and my view of him climbed considerably.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Nvm..

 

[Basil the Great]

Physical discipline?

Would you care to elaborate?

Not really and I regret that my post was so misleading. Believe me, I take a back seat to no one on Christian Forums on this subject. I interviewed women for 20+ years as a social service worker and heard probably 100-200 women tell me of the physical abuse that they suffered. OK?....... Now, I suppose that there could be some very rare situation where a wife is about to harm herself or a child. Perhaps the woman has severe mental problems. Maybe in that rare instance the husband might have to use mild violence to protect her or the child? I probably should not have even raised the matter, but in life there are almost always rare exceptions to the rule.

 

[bcbsr]

Whosoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery (Matthew 5:32).

In Matthew 19:9 it says: “Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery;"

Some think you can divorce for other reasons.

And there is some controversy over what that exception clause actually means. It's only found in Matthew and not mentioned in the following:

Mark 10:11,12 He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."

Lu 16:18 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."

Rom 7:2,3 by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man.

1Cor 7:39 A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord.

1Cor 7:10,11 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.

My take on the exception clause is that Jesus is referring to illegitimate marriages. Such as, for example, if a man divorces his legitimate wife and marries someone else, he commits adultery. Thus such a second marriage is actually not legitimate but an adultery. Divorcing our of such an illegitimate adulterous marriage would then free up the husband to reconcile with his legitimate wife. And if the woman he had married had not been previously married, he frees her up to enter into her first legitimate marriage.

 

[Basil the Great]

For what it is worth everyone, my mom had a close friend about 45 years ago who was being severely abused by her husband. My mother's friend went to her pastor for counseling and the pastor said that he could not give his approval for her to get a divorce. Considering that she went to a Mainline Protestant church, I was most surprised and saddened by the pastor's response.

 

[bcbsr]

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

Justification for divorce is not the same as justification for a remarriage, seeing as marriage lasts for the life of the spouse (Rom 7:2). I view Biblical divorce is no more than a separation. Even God got divorced. "I gave faithless Israel her certificate of divorce and sent her away because of all her adulteries." Is 3:8 Yet a few verses later he still acknowledges himself as her husband. "Return, faithless people," declares the LORD, "for I am your husband. " Jer 3:14

 

[YeshuaFan]

I as an unbeliever departed from him long before I believed in Christ.

Should I have divorced my (current and believing) husband after i was saved to become rebound to the first?

Maybe God would have appreciated if I hauled myself back to Syria so I could have been used as a sex slave for al-Qaeda.. because that is certainly what I would have been there. He wasn't exactly happy with me....

My husband (current and believing) felt led by the Holy Spirit to marry me. I was taken to a place of safety where I knew love, real love for the first time and was shown a living Christ and was saved.

God didn't abandon me in hell on earth, he showed me love when I didn't deserve it, offered me forgiveness when I deserved condemnation..

No.. I don't think God would demand I go back to the first who hated me so that I could be punished and eventually killed..

I just don't believe I'm sinning.

God said that he is into the restoration business, and that all things can be made new again in Him, and your testimony shows just that!
If you asked God to forgive your divorce, and ask the blood of Jesus to cleanse you amd wash your sin away, how can He then say"no, you must get divorced and go back to get beat up or worse"

 

[YeshuaFan]

Justification for divorce is not the same as justification for a remarriage, seeing as marriage lasts for the life of the spouse (Rom 7:2). I view Biblical divorce is no more than a separation. Even God got divorced. "I gave faithless Israel her certificate of divorce and sent her away because of all her adulteries." Is 3:8 Yet a few verses later he still acknowledges himself as her husband. "Return, faithless people," declares the LORD, "for I am your husband. " Jer 3:14

If the abuser was not saved, she can be divorced and remarried IF he chooses to end it, and if he claims to be a Christian, he needs to stop doing that!

 

[Basil the Great]

Justification for divorce is not the same as justification for a remarriage, seeing as marriage lasts for the life of the spouse (Rom 7:2). I view Biblical divorce is no more than a separation. Even God got divorced. "I gave faithless Israel her certificate of divorce and sent her away because of all her adulteries." Is 3:8 Yet a few verses later he still acknowledges himself as her husband. "Return, faithless people," declares the LORD, "for I am your husband. " Jer 3:14

Yes, you do make a valid point there. The issue would seem to be not really divorce, but divorce and remarriage. Still, I venture to say that 99% of Christians today would say that spousal abuse is justification for divorce and remarriage, myself included.

 

[brinny]

Not really and I regret that my post was so misleading. Believe me, I take a back seat to no one on Christian Forums on this subject. I interviewed women for 20+ years as a social service worker and heard probably 100-200 women tell me of the physical abuse that they suffered. OK?....... Now, I suppose that there could be some very rare situation where a wife is about to harm herself or a child. Perhaps the woman has severe mental problems. Maybe in that rare instance the husband might have to use mild violence to protect her or the child? I probably should not have even raised the matter, but in life there are almost always rare exceptions to the rule.

i'm not doubting your intervention and ministry to abused spouses. However, physical discipline is a cause for concern. It is written that one should not even as much as frustrate one's child or cause conflict and confusion to avoid that conflict. It certainly would be even more so to respect one's spouse and not resort to "physical discipline" for ANY reason whatsoever. If a spouse is out of control and intervention is needed, one REMOVES the children, and calls for intervention from a SAFE place. Neither spouse should ever resort to "physical discipline". It's "dis-honoring" and "shameful". Both spouses are admonished to "honor" one another.

 

[YeshuaFan]

Yes, you do make a valid point there. The issue would seem to be not really divorce, but divorce and remarriage. Still, I venture to say that 99% of Christians today would say that spousal abuse is justification for divorce and remarriage, myself included.

I would say that there is at least grounds to discuss remarriage possibility if other partner was not saved and left, kept physical abusing, or kept doing adultery and no change of behavior ever happened.

 

[Basil the Great]

i'm not doubting your intervention and ministry to abused spouses. However, physical discipline is a cause for concern. It is written that one should not even as much as frustrate one's child or cause conflict and confusion to avoid that conflict. It certainly would be even more so to respect one's spouse and not resort to "physical discipline" for ANY reason whatsoever. If a spouse is out of control and intervention is needed, one REMOVES the children, and calls for intervention from a SAFE place. Neither spouse should ever resort to "physical discipline". It's "dis-honoring" and "shameful". Both spouses are admonished to "honor" one another.

I do not disagree with you. My post was misleading and I do regret it. It is best sometimes not even to bring up those very rare possible exceptions, as such can be misinterpreted. Personally, I cannot imagine myself ever hitting a woman and never have.

 

[bcbsr]

It is called the Pauline Privilege, and recognized by the Catholic Church. There is also something called the Petrine Privilege. I'm not up on the details of that much rarer one. Basically all the other situations recognized by the Catholic Church involve flaws at the time of the marriage that would mean the marriage was never valid. For example a flaw in consent, or marrying too close a relative. Those wouldn't be considered marriages to begin with. For a valid marriage the Catholic Church would allow separation if need be, divorce if need be, but not a remarriage. Protestants seem to have a wide variety of beliefs about remarriage after divorce.

But I find Catholics get around the restrictions by simply having their marriages illegitimately annulled. After having 5 kids and over 20 years of marriage my mother divorced my father (who was a staunch Catholic) in the courts. After a while my father starting dating and wanted to marry a woman he found and so went to the Catholic Church to try to nullify his first marriage. He got denied at the first one, but got the OK at a different diocese on the basis that his first wife hadn't taken the marriage vow seriously, and thereby turning his kids (including myself) into illegitimate bastards. And that's one way they get around the Catholic restrictions. If one goes to the courts to divorce, the other can nullify the marriage on the basis that the spouse hadn't taken the vow seriously.

 

[bcbsr]

If the abuser was not saved, she can be divorced and remarried IF he chooses to end it, and if he claims to be a Christian, he needs to stop doing that!

You're talking about the 1Cor 7 passage. As I see it's not talking about remarriage. It's talking about a legitimate reason for separation. (Not being willing to live peaceably together)

 

[Basil the Great]

I once thought that the Catholic annulment process was kind of neat and in theory I still do. However, there seems to be something amiss with the whole thing, as reportedly the number of annulments issued has climbed dramatically in recent decades. Hence, I find it hard to believe that 100% of the annulments granted are really valid.