The Bible's Laws on Divorce and Remarriage.

[Bible Highlighter]

Paul provides accommodation for the one who is abandon not the one who abandons. I'm not sure why you suggest the latter. v15 says "But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved." The abandon partner is no longer bound to their unbelieving partner. I'm not sure how else you would interpret this.

Thank you for emphasizing 1 Corinthians 7:15.

So I am reminded here by this verse that there is a another rule of exception involving unbelievers.

Verse 15 is a special case involving being married to unbelievers. But we still have to read verse 15 in light of 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:2. These two verses say that a person is not loosed from the law of their marriage unless the other spouse is dead. A person cannot remarry still if the previous spouse is still alive.

Verse 15 is merely saying that if a person who is not a Christian wants to depart and divorce their Christian spouse, the believer should let the unbelieving spouse divorce them. But this does not mean they can remarry unless the spouse of their previous marriage dies. Should a Christian divorce their spouse because they are an unbeliever? Paul's advice is not to divorce them but he doesn't say it is a sin if you do. He says we are not in bondage in such cases. So yes, I do see that divorce could be allowed between a believer and an unbeliever; But they cannot remarry unless their previous spouse is dead.

1 Corinthians 6:16 says,
"What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh."

It's why there are sexual diseases when people have multiple sex partners.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I know, and that is part of the problem...



I have heard it many times, but it's wrong, so...?



If you believe it is the eventual aim and goal of it all, then why do you not make any allowances for it for someone "in the process", still...?



What is or are "grievous sins" to you...? Are they not what grieves God and the Holy Spirit the most...? So, what would those be, what Kind of sin or sins does God absolutely "hate" the most, or more than anything or any others...?



Agreed... though may not be entirely always and perpetually successful in this life...



What do you consider "justifying sin" is...?

God Bless!

Please stop interrupting the thread.
We are talking about marriage and divorce.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So it is true that one can only divorce by unfaithfulness according to Jesus because he was referring to two believers being married. Paul extends a rule of exception to divorce in special cases between a believer and an unbeliever being married.

 

[gordonhooker]

So you don't think there are any rules in the Bible? That is non-sense. The Bible is a rule book because it has rules within it; Just as I can say that the Bible is a book of stories or a Story Book because it tells us God's Story. The Bible is many things. Most importantly it is our instruction manual to get to know the Author, who is GOD.

There is a big difference between a rule book and a book that contains some recommendations on how one should live. If you wish to call it a rule book when it is far more than that, then expect people to tell you it is not.

 

[servantofiam]

Forcing a woman to remain tied to a narcissistic violent man is sadism . Even if physically separated or divorced he’s going to cause her problems . I still say the best solution is to kick that trash to the curb with the rest of the garbage and if she wants, to get a better relationship . A piece of paper isn’t more important than a healthy mind or body . PTSD is not good for you

Logically speaking, I absolutely agree. And more due to the fact a Narcissist is psychologically damaged with a definite psychological disorder. And only God can repair the mind of those types of individuals.

40 years ago, anyone with psychological disorders would have been deemed demonic possessed by the church. And sadly, the typical actions and results from a Narcissist definitely appears to be demonic in nature, even though it is 100% mentally impaired.

But none the less, God's Holy WORD is still God's Holy Word. And we can never fully understand the things God allows. All we can do as true believers is to follow God's Holy Word. And if that results in death, then the trust and faith we had in God now lays at God's doorstep. And knowing that He cannot lie nor go against His Word or promise, ensures us a better place with God in the next life!!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

...

 

[Strong in Him]

Logically speaking, I absolutely agree. And more due to the fact a Narcissist is psychologically damaged with a definite psychological disorder. And only God can repair the mind of those types of individuals.

40 years ago, anyone with psychological disorders would have been deemed demonic possessed by the church. And sadly, the typical actions and results from a Narcissist definitely appears to be demonic in nature, even though it is 100% mentally impaired.

But none the less, God's Holy WORD is still God's Holy Word. And we can never fully understand the things God allows.

Are you saying that God, who IS love, would expect someone to remain married to a violent person/narcissist/ someone who has, or develops, MH problems and makes their lives hell? Are you saying that the person, and/or their kids have to remain in that hellish situation until they die or are killed?

 

[gordonhooker]

I am not saying the Bible is a rule book alone.
But you are incorrect to say this of the Bible:

"There is a big difference between a rule book and a book that contains some recommendations on how one should live."
~ Gordonhooker ​

The Bible does not have some recommendations, it has many!!!
The Law of Moses has about 613 commands.
The New Covenant or New Testament has even more commands than this. But it does have many rules or commands within it. To say that the Bible is no way like a rule book is false. It is one aspect of the Bible. The Bible has many commands or rules within it. Do you disagree?

Excuse me will you stop trying to disrupt this thread, it is about marriage and re-marriage, not about your own opinions on rule books.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Excuse me will you stop trying to disrupt this thread, it is about marriage and re-marriage, not about your own opinions on rule books.

I am the creator of the thread, and I did not consider it to be a continual disruption of the thread topic. I did move my post to a new thread. Anyways, if you want to discuss it further, you can do so here in this new CF thread:

Is it correct to say, "One aspect of the Bible is that it is like a rule book"?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Are you saying that God, who IS love, would expect someone to remain married to a violent person/narcissist/ someone who has, or develops, MH problems and makes their lives hell? Are you saying that the person, and/or their kids have to remain in that hellish situation until they die or are killed?

I think it is safe to say that in this situation, they are probably not a believer, and in light of revisiting 1 Corinthians 7:15, it could be grounds for possible divorce. If they are a believer (this would be seriously problematic). A separation of living would be necessary, but not divorce if they are both true genuine believers in Jesus.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Please stop interrupting the thread.

Why bother to even start a thread asking the question if you are already decided about what the answer is?

Here's a scenario: A wife deserts her husband and marries another. Several years later, the deserted husband marries a widow. Who has sinned in this case?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

So it is true that one can only divorce by unfaithfulness according to Jesus because he was referring to two believers being married. Paul extends a rule of exception to divorce in special cases between a believer and an unbeliever being married.

It is interesting that when Paul visited Jerusalem and conferred with the Apostles concerning the requirements that were to be put on the Gentile churches, there were three basic things, and divorce and remarriage were not mentioned at all. So, according to the Apostles and Paul in agreement no rule was made concerning divorce and remarriage for Gentile churches.

This council was formed in reaction to "false apostles" going to the Gentile churches and saying that they had to follow the Law of Moses in order to be saved. Paul told the Galatians that because of this type of legalism that was attacking the churches there, that they were being bewitched by so called Christians preaching Judaism.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Why bother to even start a thread asking the question if you are already decided about what the answer is?

First, not sure why you are quoting another poster on an unrelated topic. Second, it is not uncommon among articles, books, movies, etc. to ask a question with a follow through answer. Surely you should know this; Unless of course you are just nitpicking and seeking to find fault where there really is not any.

Here's a scenario: A wife deserts her husband and marries another. Several years later, the deserted husband marries a widow. Who has sinned in this case?

It sounds like two separate scenarios and not one. The wife in the first scenario could only remarry if her previous husband died. Seeing that you suggested that he is still living, she would be committing adultery by remarrying. 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:2 says that that a person is not loosed from the law of marriage unless the other spouse dies. The second scenario would be no different. The husband could not remarry because he would still technically be married in God's eyes to his previous wife unless she died.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It is interesting that when Paul visited Jerusalem and conferred with the Apostles concerning the requirements that were to be put on the Gentile churches, there were three basic things, and divorce and remarriage were not mentioned at all. So, according to the Apostles and Paul in agreement no rule was made concerning divorce and remarriage for Gentile churches.

No. Between Jesus and Paul, we have what we need to know on marriage and divorce. We are not to add to God's Word.

This council was formed in reaction to "false apostles" going to the Gentile churches and saying that they had to follow the Law of Moses in order to be saved. Paul told the Galatians that because of this type of legalism that was attacking the churches there, that they were being bewitched by so called Christians preaching Judaism.

I don't believe we are under the whole of the 613 laws of Moses (contractually speaking). Certain Moral laws of the OT have been repeated into the New Covenant, but the Old Covenant Law as a whole is no more. We are under a New Covenant with New Commands. God's commands in the New Testament are not in conflict with the New Testament. See 1 Timothy 6:3-4.

The problem Paul had was "Circumcision Salvationism" or in going back to the whole of the OT Law that was no longer a binding covenant or contract anymore. As a result, Paul was fighting against "Law Alone Salvationism." However, Paul was not against the necessity of obeying Christ's commands as a part of a believer's salvation after they are saved by God's grace through faith. Jesus Himself taught that if you will enter into life, keep the commandments (Matthew 19:17) (Also see: Luke 10:25-28).

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

First, not sure why you are quoting another poster on an unrelated topic. Second, it is not uncommon among articles, books, movies, etc. to ask a question with a follow through answer. Surely you should know this; Unless of course you are just nitpicking and seeking to find fault where there really is not any.

I think I am putting reasonable comments as fair debate. What I am questioning is your implication that every divorced and remarried person is going to hell. What other implication could there be from your comments?

It sounds like two separate scenarios and not one. The wife in the first scenario could only remarry if her previous husband died. Seeing that you suggested that he is still living, she would be committing adultery by remarrying. 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:2 says that that a person is not loosed from the law of marriage unless the other spouse dies. The second scenario would be no different. The husband could not remarry because he would still technically be married in God's eyes to his previous wife unless she died.

How can that be, if the deserting wife marries again, isn't she being unfaithful and therefore the deserted husband is free from the marriage bond and therefore free to remarry.
The very first Scripture you quoted backs that up that divorce is only acceptable if one partner is unfaithful. Surely if the wife remarries, she is being technically unfaithful to her first husband, therefore the first husband is no longer under any obligation and therefore would not be sinning if he married again.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I think I am putting reasonable comments as fair debate. What I am questioning is your implication that every divorced and remarried person is going to hell. What other implication could there be from your comments?

They can most certainly separate and seek God's forgiveness, or their previous spouse could die (Which would change matters).

We tend to think things are okay just because it does not seem that sinful to us. But the heart is deceitful. I will trust God's Word in what it says (1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:9) and not in what you say. It may seem unfair, then again the whole entire fall of man was by the disobedience to eating of a particular forbidden tree. So the concept that we are talking about here is one of obedience to what God's Word actually says and it is not out of sympathy for loved ones we know who remarried that we do not want to see condemned.

How can that be, if the deserting wife marries again, isn't she being unfaithful and therefore the deserted husband is free from the marriage bond and therefore free to remarry.
The very first Scripture you quoted backs that up that divorce is only acceptable if one partner is unfaithful. Surely if the wife remarries, she is being technically unfaithful to her first husband, therefore the first husband is no longer under any obligation and therefore would not be sinning if he married again.

No, my friend. 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 says,

10 "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.'

We see in the scenario that when a wife departs from her husband, she is to remain unmarried OR she is to be reconciled back to her husband.

The other option is if her husband dies and she becomes a widow. In this case, she can remarry because Scripture says she is loosed from the law of marriage by her spouse's death (See again: 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:2).

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

No. Between Jesus and Paul, we have what we need to know on marriage and divorce. We are not to add to God's Word.

But wouldn't it be an addition to God's Word if something that was said by Jesus in response to comments by Pharisees and directed at them, was then turned into a requirement for all Christians?

I don't believe we are under the whole of the 613 laws of Moses (contractually speaking). Certain Moral laws of the OT have been repeated into the New Covenant, but the Old Covenant Law as a whole is no more. We are under a New Covenant with New Commands. God's commands in the New Testament are not in conflict with the New Testament. See 1 Timothy 6:3-4.

The problem I have with Paul's teaching to the Corinthians about divorce is that he was directing it to deal with a specific problem that was occurring, that Christian men were deliberately divorcing their wives so they could be closer to the Lord (in their view). You see, we have to ask the question about why Paul gave these instructions to the Corinthians and no one else. What was going on in the Corinthian church and nowhere else that made Paul give this teaching to them? When we do a bit of research we discover the reason Paul gave this teaching to them.

Surely, husbands and wives in the other churches were getting divorced and remarried, so why did Paul not give them instructions as well? Perhaps the reasons why these ones had marriage breakups did not concern Paul enough to make an issue out of it.

Although Paul gave specific instructions that the guy who was having an affair with his father's wife should be put out of the church until he repents and breaks off the affair. Don't you think it is strange that he does not give the same instructions for divorced and remarried folk in the church? It seems that their situation is not serious enough for them to be treated as "leaven" that would affect the whole church and spread ungodliness through it.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

They can most certainly separate and seek God's forgiveness, or their previous spouse could die (Which would change matters).

We tend to think things are okay just because it does not seem that sinful to us. But the heart is deceitful. I will trust God's Word in what it says (1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:9) and not in what you say. It may seem unfair, then again the whole entire fall of man was by the disobedience to eating of a particular forbidden tree. So the concept that we are talking about here is one of obedience to what God's Word actually says and it is not out of sympathy for loved ones we know who remarried that we do not want to see condemned.



No, my friend. 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 says,

10 "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.'

We see in the scenario that when a wife departs from her husband, she is to remain unmarried OR she is to be reconciled back to her husband.

The other option is if her husband dies and she becomes a widow. In this case, she can remarry because Scripture says she is loosed from the law of marriage by her spouse's death (See again: 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:2).

You have said quite rightly about a wife who departs from her husband, but there are no instructions about what the husband should do. So to put any requirement on a husband whose wife deserts him is to add to God Word's things that are just not stated.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

But wouldn't it be an addition to God's Word if something that was said by Jesus in response to comments by Pharisees and directed at them, was then turned into a requirement for all Christians?

Hypotheticals do not mean anything. Nowhere did I do such a thing. I am merely giving you what God's Word says, and you are simply not in agreement with it.

The problem I have with Paul's teaching to the Corinthians about divorce is that he was directing it to deal with a specific problem that was occurring, that Christian men were deliberately divorcing their wives so they could be closer to the Lord (in their view). You see, we have to ask the question about why Paul gave these instructions to the Corinthians and no one else. What was going on in the Corinthian church and nowhere else that made Paul give this teaching to them? When we do a bit of research we discover the reason Paul gave this teaching to them.

You have a problem with Paul's teaching on divorce?
I am also aware of the context of the situation.
It does not change what Paul said.
If you think it does, then please feel free to share your interpretation.

Surely, husbands and wives in the other churches were getting divorced and remarried, so why did Paul not give them instructions as well? Perhaps the reasons why these ones had marriage breakups did not concern Paul enough to make an issue out of it.

There was an epistle mentioned by Paul that we never got read. But this was not deemed as important by God to be included in His Word (the Bible). I believe in divine preservation of God's Word and that we have what words are needed for our faith today.

Although Paul gave specific instructions that the guy who was having an affair with his father's wife should be put out of the church until he repents and breaks off the affair. Don't you think it is strange that he does not give the same instructions for divorced and remarried folk in the church? It seems that their situation is not serious enough for them to be treated as "leaven" that would affect the whole church and spread ungodliness through it.

The issue here was that they were contending to stay single and they were looking at marriage as something as possibly sinful. Paul was making some clarifications here about their error and he was giving them advice about marriage and divorce. Verses 10-11 were commands of the Lord and the rest was his own advice.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You have said quite rightly about a wife who departs from her husband, but there are no instructions about what the husband should do. So to put any requirement on a husband whose wife deserts him is to add to God Word's things that are just not stated.

Verses 10-11 (Which is a command from the Lord) says that if a spouse is to depart, she is not to remarry or she is to be reconciled back to her husband.

Verse 15 deals with a Christian and a non-believer being married; And if they depart, they are to let them go (because they are not bound in such a case).

But in both cases, they are not to remarry.

Paul is merely saying that verse 15 is an extended reason for divorce being a special case between a Christian and unbeliever. This does not give a spouse the okay to remarry. Only death of the previous partner or spouse can they be allowed to remarry.