Annulment and Remarriage = Adultery

Is an annulment and then remarriage still considered adultery based on the example I gave in my post

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    3

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I looked at your other thread again.

I do not believe Jesus wants us to suffer sustained abuse.

Taking what you say at face value this man has broken the marriage covenant and you are free to leave.

I would not however initiate legal separation at this stage if at all - there is a big difference between divorcing and being divorced.

I would seek the blessing of an elder you trust first (if you have one) then ask him to be there for you as you plan to move on.

Obviously if Holy Spirit says no, then test out the authenticity of that voice with others as things can get confused.
 
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Look again at the 'woman at the well' The religious would not have allowed Jesus to even speak to her - how wrong they were. (by the way she had had 5 husbands and the one she was presently with was some-one else's partner.)

Look again at the woman "caught in adultery" the religious wanted her stoned.
Jesus showed loving compassion. Again how wrong were the religious.

You have many religious on this forum - hold on to Jesus and trust His voice.

He wants good for us not calamity.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: twobecomeone
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,810
10,792
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟827,333.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Hello Brothers and Sisters,

I apologize in advance as I know Divorce and Remarriage is an ongoing topic/debate here. I’ve posted here before regarding my difficult situation and I appreciate all the feedback I received from my fellow Brethren’s. There another aspect to my previous post that I am wondering about and it’s regarding whether my marriage is valid in God’s eyes. I believe I was convicted recently since separating from my spouse that it wasn’t and it was not blessed (see my previous post). However I am fearful to sin and I don’t want to go to hell for iniating divorce which I have already started the process, but could easily stop. I got saved about almost 2 years ago and when I read what Jesus taught I feared my salvation being married to my spouse! I plan to speak with my church counselor and pastor at church about it. However I know that a lot of Christian (Protestant?) churches believe in remarriage but Jesus said No exception— I will go that route (divorce) even if it pains my spouse who is attempting to save the “marriage.” From what I heard, my pastor is also remarried so this scares me as I don’t want to be lead astray by wrong beliefs. Thank you all in advance for reading and responding. So here is my concerns summed up:

What I am struggling with right now is hearing Gods voice on divorcing him. The reason why is because I believe/read he is still married to his previous wife based on Matthew 19:9 and Romans 7:2-3. I have completely gotten rid of any and everything we had together as a “married” couple because based on what I was shown, heard by The Holy Spirit, read in scriptures, and also videos and articles (such as a catholic priest name Erasmus created remarriage and it was wrong), it was something I had with a man who was never my husband to begin with and I’m committing continuous adultery.

Long story short, they were young and married while drunk and did not see each other as husband and wife. They never consummated the marriage and only saw each other a few times afterward. He annulled the marriage shortly after and they never spoke again. Christian Pastors spoken to have said our marriage is real because an annulment means the marriage happened for illigitamate reasons and our vows were conscious and real. My spouse is an unbeliever, I was a “Christian” during our marriage but did not get Saved until a few years ago. We/I are not Catholic so Catholic annulment advice would not help me.


So would it still be valid marriage in God’s eyes if For Example: people do it when on drugs, drunk, a green card, or a gay man and a gay women getting married to trick their family into thinking they’re straight (but have outside relationships) but now one wants to divorce?

Thank you all in advance. This has been eating me up and I am very conflicted. I will also be in prayer on this because I do not know if this is God’s way of saying I am free from a destructive marriage and He’s testing me to see if I will put Him first before my spouse or is this satan seeking to destroy a marriage. I need to know what I need to hear and not what I want to here. Thank you all.
What point was Jesus making in the context of what He was saying to the Jews in the passage in Matthew? Was divorce and remarriage His main point, or was it a side point to give an example of His main point. And if it was just a side point to His main point to the Jews, is it really spoken to us, 2000 years later in a totally different culture and mind-set?

The same with Paul. Was divorce and remarriage his main point in the passage, or, in the same way, a side point to give an example of his main point that he wanted to say to the Romans? So, was his main point to the Romans to give them a theological treatise on divorce and remarriage, when all he was doing was writing a letter to that church to answer their specific questions?

The problem is that if you ignore the context, then you "blow" the verse and make it meaningless. The verses mean only what they mean in the actual context of what was said and written.

The other question you have to ask is, what did Jesus and Paul intend in saying and writing the paragraph that contained the verses you are attempting to support your theory? If Jesus and Paul did not intend to say and write to their hearers and readers, and if the listeners and readers did not understand it in the way that you are interpreting it, then you might be making Jesus and Paul say what they never actually said or intended; and if they read your interpretation, they might say, "I never said that!"
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,810
10,792
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟827,333.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
In Matthew 19;9, Jesus says, "And I say to you'. Who is He saying it to? The Pharisees in First Century Jerusalem. He did not say, "I am saying this to all people now and in the future", because if I took it to mean that, I am adding to God's Word something that is not there. Jesus spoke exclusively to the Pharisees and to no one else. He did not say it to His disciples, or to the ordinary people. Nor can we take it to mean that He is saying it to us, 2000 years later.

So, if you are receiving a condemnation bomb on the basis of that Scripture, it is not coming from the Holy Spirit, but from a lying spirit that is quoting that Scripture out of context. Satan tried that sort of thing with Jesus and was defeated when Jesus quoted Scripture in context back to him.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,810
10,792
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟827,333.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Here is the first part of Romans 7 in context:
"7 Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2 For example, 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 that binds her to him. 3 So then, if she has sexual relations with 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 if she marries another man.

4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For when we were in the realm of the flesh,[a] the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code
."

Paul's point here is that he is dealing with those who know the Law and is using marriage to support his main point, which is not primarily about marriage and adultery at all. He is seeking to show them that a person who is bound to the Law is made free from the Law when he dies, and the believer has died with Christ on the cross, and therefore is free from his "marriage" to the Law.

Paul never intended to give a comprehensive thesis on divorce and remarriage. All he did was to give a very limited general example of marriage to support his main point. Also, we need to take note (context again!) that he is speaking to those who know the Law. In other words he is speaking specifically to Jewish believers and not Gentile ones. Gentiles did not know or keep to the Mosaic Law, therefore Paul did not have to teach them about Law and Grace, because they would not have understood the distinction.

So what did Paul's readers understand about what he was writing to them? His main point! - that through the death of Christ and them dying with Him on the cross through faith, they are released from the requirements of the Law!

It is dangerous and an error to form a 21st Century doctrine about marriage based on a side point that Paul made; and especially when he made it to First Century Roman Jewish believers who had not yet got totally free from the Law, and so had quite a different culture and mind-set.

In our 21st Century culture, we have marriage breakups caused by adultery, domestic violence, desertion, and criminal partners sentenced to life imprisonment for murder. So there is a lot of information that has not been dealt with in Romans, so Paul not giving that information to them, and therefore not to us in our time and culture, then there is no hard and fast rule about divorce and remarriage, and each case is determined on what is appropriate to our cultural norms. To force First Century culture and norms 2000 years later, without sufficient information to make a consistent judgment about whether a divorce and remarriage is morally right, is impractical and unfair and not according to the spirit of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Endeavourer

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2017
1,719
1,472
Cloud 9
✟89,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I do not have time today to engage on this thread, but quickly wanted to point out two disagreements with this advice. I've observed Carl's posts in the past, and it is clear that he has a tender heart before the Lord. So, I have a lot of respect for Carl, but must take exception with these two points:

I would not however initiate legal separation at this stage if at all - there is a big difference between divorcing and being divorced.

With the behaviors this man has shown it is important that she obtain legal separation and divorce protection for her financial well being. She will be pursued for any debts he incurs while they are married even if she is phsyically separated. She has supported him and provided for him for much (all?) of their marriage. He would not have the means to repay his debts and has shown psychopathic behavior against her - definitely he has the capacity to purposefully cause great financial harm to her that could take decades to recover.

In the prior thread I provided some comments about a state issued marriage certificate being extra-Biblical anyway (nowhere does the Bible require one), so taking steps to dissolve the extra-Biblical license in no way should make a difference on your divorce theology, as to whether to consider someone divorced before the Lord, if that is your conscience.

I would seek the blessing of an elder you trust first (if you have one) then ask him to be there for you as you plan to move on.

Here again, use caution and test their advice against Scripture. I've been involved in many a case where terrible and unBiblical advice was given to abused women (it's an area many pastors are not expert in), even to the point abused women were pursued for church discipline for separating from an abuser.

Shockingly, I've seen multiple pastors advise abused women that the abuse was their fault because they should have submitted better. Even the (in)famous John Piper advised women to submit to abuse, even if it means being hit, while trying to submissively entreat their husbands to stop abusing them. Unfortunately, secular resources tend to understand the dynamics of abuse and effective responses better than most pastors.

Please use caution with this, and don't accept what a pastor says as truth until you test it out.
 
Last edited:
  • Friendly
Reactions: twobecomeone
Upvote 0

Endeavourer

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2017
1,719
1,472
Cloud 9
✟89,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Since Paidiske, a pastor, has chimed in on this thread, I'll clarify to my comments above that I've observed her posts and she is one of those pastors who understands the dynamics of abuse. I've observed that she is a safe resource for abused people with respect to her understanding of how Scripture applies to marital abuse.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,644.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I do not have time today to engage on this thread, but quickly wanted to point out two disagreements with this advice. I've observed Carl's posts in the past, and it is clear that he has a tender heart before the Lord. So, I have a lot of respect for Carl, but must take exception with these two points:



With the behaviors this man has shown it is important that she obtain legal separation and divorce protection for her financial well being. She will be pursued for any debts he incurs while they are married even if she is phsyically separated. She has supported him and provided for him for much (all?) of their marriage. He would not have the means to repay his debts and has shown psychopathic behavior against her - definitely he has the capacity to purposefully cause great financial harm to her that could take decades to recover.

In the prior thread I provided some comments about a state issued marriage certificate being extra-Biblical anyway (nowhere does the Bible require one), so taking steps to dissolve the extra-Biblical license in no way should make a difference on your divorce theology, as to whether to consider someone divorced before the Lord, if that is your conscience.



Here again, use caution and test their advice against Scripture. I've been involved in many a case where terrible and unBiblical advice was given to abused women (it's an area many pastors are not expert in), even to the point abused women were pursued for church discipline for separating from an abuser.

Shockingly, I've seen multiple pastors advise abused women that the abuse was their fault because they should have submitted better. Even the (in)famous John Piper advised women to submit to abuse, even if it means being hit, while trying to submissively entreat their husbands to stop abusing them. Unfortunately, secular resources tend to understand the dynamics of abuse and effective responses better than most pastors.

Please use caution with this, and don't accept what a pastor says as truth until you test it out.

Yes... I have to agree on both points, I leaned too much on my own experience which was much less extreme. I apologise.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Endeavourer
Upvote 0

Swan7

Made in the image of His Grace
Supporter
Aug 3, 2014
9,158
7,354
Forever Summer
✟435,986.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Jesus said No exception

Where did Jesus say this in the Bible?

It's important to view God's Word in His light. The way God views marriage is very different from man's tradition of a piece of paper. Adam and Eve did not receive that and they were still married in God's sight. Look at the Samaritan woman at the well, Jesus already knew she wasn't married by man's law, but yet He stated she had 5 husbands.
John 4

Again, I implore you to ask God these questions and be patient with Him, allow Him to speak to you about this - and the way He speaks. What may seem an obstacle to us can very well be used as a lesson and a time for testing of our faith, but don't let that discourage you. Let it encourage you, new sister in Christ. I've also been tested and tried by God in my own situations to trust Him. It's not easy, but if you are serious about Him, let Him speak to you and teach you His ways. :yellowheart:
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: twobecomeone
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,810
10,792
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟827,333.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
I do not have time today to engage on this thread, but quickly wanted to point out two disagreements with this advice. I've observed Carl's posts in the past, and it is clear that he has a tender heart before the Lord. So, I have a lot of respect for Carl, but must take exception with these two points:



With the behaviors this man has shown it is important that she obtain legal separation and divorce protection for her financial well being. She will be pursued for any debts he incurs while they are married even if she is phsyically separated. She has supported him and provided for him for much (all?) of their marriage. He would not have the means to repay his debts and has shown psychopathic behavior against her - definitely he has the capacity to purposefully cause great financial harm to her that could take decades to recover.

In the prior thread I provided some comments about a state issued marriage certificate being extra-Biblical anyway (nowhere does the Bible require one), so taking steps to dissolve the extra-Biblical license in no way should make a difference on your divorce theology, as to whether to consider someone divorced before the Lord, if that is your conscience.



Here again, use caution and test their advice against Scripture. I've been involved in many a case where terrible and unBiblical advice was given to abused women (it's an area many pastors are not expert in), even to the point abused women were pursued for church discipline for separating from an abuser.

Shockingly, I've seen multiple pastors advise abused women that the abuse was their fault because they should have submitted better. Even the (in)famous John Piper advised women to submit to abuse, even if it means being hit, while trying to submissively entreat their husbands to stop abusing them. Unfortunately, secular resources tend to understand the dynamics of abuse and effective responses better than most pastors.

Please use caution with this, and don't accept what a pastor says as truth until you test it out.
I agree. Because Jesus and Paul treated divorce and remarriage as just examples to their main points, there is a lot of information left out in the Scripture. When there is sketchy information about an issue, God expects us to use our own judgment about these matters. He gave us common sense, and in a case of severe domestic violence where a spouse's life is in danger by staying in a marriage, then the common sense decision would be to get out of it.

Where there is desertion, with no possibility of reconciliation, there is no option but divorce. Why flog a dead horse as it were? Of course, being free from a marriage because of adultery is clearly set out in Scripture but it is the only one; but that does not mean that there are no other reasons why a divorce would be the appropriate decision to end a marriage. If Jesus or Paul's point was to give comprehensive teaching on divorce and remarriage, then they would have. But they didn't, so it is left for those who have to consider the options and make the heart-breaking decision for themselves and trust God for the future.

The problem with legalistic and judgmental folk is that where the Scripture gives sketchy information about something that may not be what the main point of the passage is, they make folk comply with the limited option given in the side point. I see that as bullying and spiritual abuse, and adding to the Scripture material that was not there, and what Jesus and Paul never intended. If they intended what these spiritual abusers are saying they did, then Jesus and Paul would have said it clearly. Jesus' principle in giving information and teaching is, "If it were not so, I would have told you."

So in that case, if Jesus does not approve of divorce and remarriage through domestic violence, criminal behaviour, or desertion, along with adultery, He would have clearly told us. But the reality is, He didn't, so He leaves the decision up to us as to whether it is the best decision for us in the light of our circumstances.
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,130
19,010
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,719.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Since Paidiske, a pastor, has chimed in on this thread, I'll clarify to my comments above that I've observed her posts and she is one of those pastors who understands the dynamics of abuse. I've observed that she is a safe resource for abused people with respect to her understanding of how Scripture applies to marital abuse.

Thank you, Endeavourer. This issue is very close to my heart, and it means a lot that others can recognise the fruit of the work I've put into it.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,810
10,792
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟827,333.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Jesus said No exception
Jesus never said that at all. We have to be careful about adding to God's Word. There is a prohibition to it in Proverbs 30:6:
"Do not add to his words, or he may rebuke you and expose you as a liar."
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Endeavourer
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

twobecomeone

Active Member
Nov 29, 2018
25
27
Mountain Standard
✟11,012.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you all for your responses. :groupray: To Oscarr, I am referring to the "exception" clause written in Matthew 19:9 which was written to the Jews vs what was written in Mark and Luke (to Gentiles) which gives no exception. The "except" fornication pertained to the betrothal (engagement) period for Jews so that is why there is "No" exception in Mark and Luke (example Luke 16:18) because Gentiles don't follow the Jewish betrothal ---so that was what I mean't by Jesus saying "no" because when speaking to Gentiles, "no" exception is given. Scripture like Roman 7: 1-3 say marriage is basically "till death do you part." I was concerned based on these scriptures that my marriage was seen as continuous adultery because he had been married before and she is still living (Romans 7).

Christian Pastors have said his other marriage was not a "valid" marriage because it was annulled and they never consummated the marriage. So far, I only received 1 answer here to that. Regardless of the answers, I will still remain separated for a good while from him (based off of my past post) and I thank you all again for your concerns and feedback. I just want to do what is right is God's eye even if it means "divorcing" from a "marriage" that was never one to begin with.

So to clarify what I am asking:

My spouse married someone when he was young while they were drunk and they did not see each other as husband and wife. They never consummated the marriage and only saw each other a few times afterward. He annulled the marriage shortly after and they never spoke again. Christian Pastors spoken to have said our marriage is real because an annulment means the marriage happened for illegitimate reasons and our vows were conscious and real.


But based on what I am interpreting from scripture, he made a Vow regardless of how he did it and God takes that (marriage covenant) seriously. Given this, would a marriage still be a Valid marriage in God’s eyes if For Example:

people do it when on drugs, drunk, a green card, or a gay man and a gay women getting married to trick their family into thinking they’re straight (but have outside relationships)?

Would it still be a valid marriage if these people in the example I given above said Vows before God but didn't mean it (such as a green card card marriage, or people getting drunk and running off to Vegas) and then divorced their spouse and marry another?

Thank you all again. :hug::hug::hug::hug::groupray::groupray::groupray:
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,130
19,010
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,719.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
If he was drunk when he said his vows the first time (or she was, or both), that was not a valid marriage, because you can't consent when drunk. Which would leave open the possibility for your marriage to be valid.

But even if your marriage is/was valid, that does not require you to endure being abused.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: twobecomeone
Upvote 0

twobecomeone

Active Member
Nov 29, 2018
25
27
Mountain Standard
✟11,012.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If he was drunk when he said his vows the first time (or she was, or both), that was not a valid marriage, because you can't consent when drunk. Which would leave open the possibility for your marriage to be valid.

But even if your marriage is/was valid, that does not require you to endure being abused.



Thank you, I go further into this question because that was what some Christian Pastors have said to me (drunk = not valid). So I want to be sure that is the case.


What then if two people agreed to marry for documents only? Wouldn't they still be considered married because they made Vows before God to one another regardless of how they did it?
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,130
19,010
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,719.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
What then if two people agreed to marry for documents only? Wouldn't they still be considered married because they made Vows before God to one another regardless of how they did it?

Under Australian law they would. The point is the saying of the vows/signing of the documents, not the motivation for doing so. I am not sure about the details of American law.

In terms of church (canon) law and custom, I think they would, too; because they freely consented. There might be some doubt about that if one of them had deceived the other about their intentions.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: twobecomeone
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,810
10,792
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟827,333.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Thank you all for your responses. :groupray: To Oscarr, I am referring to the "exception" clause written in Matthew 19:9 which was written to the Jews vs what was written in Mark and Luke (to Gentiles) which gives no exception. The "except" fornication pertained to the betrothal (engagement) period for Jews so that is why there is "No" exception in Mark and Luke (example Luke 16:18) because Gentiles don't follow the Jewish betrothal ---so that was what I mean't by Jesus saying "no" because when speaking to Gentiles, "no" exception is given. Scripture like Roman 7: 1-3 say marriage is basically "till death do you part." I was concerned based on these scriptures that my marriage was seen as continuous adultery because he had been married before and she is still living (Romans 7).

Christian Pastors have said his other marriage was not a "valid" marriage because it was annulled and they never consummated the marriage. So far, I only received 1 answer here to that. Regardless of the answers, I will still remain separated for a good while from him (based off of my past post) and I thank you all again for your concerns and feedback. I just want to do what is right is God's eye even if it means "divorcing" from a "marriage" that was never one to begin with.

So to clarify what I am asking:

My spouse married someone when he was young while they were drunk and they did not see each other as husband and wife. They never consummated the marriage and only saw each other a few times afterward. He annulled the marriage shortly after and they never spoke again. Christian Pastors spoken to have said our marriage is real because an annulment means the marriage happened for illegitimate reasons and our vows were conscious and real.


But based on what I am interpreting from scripture, he made a Vow regardless of how he did it and God takes that (marriage covenant) seriously. Given this, would a marriage still be a Valid marriage in God’s eyes if For Example:

people do it when on drugs, drunk, a green card, or a gay man and a gay women getting married to trick their family into thinking they’re straight (but have outside relationships)?

Would it still be a valid marriage if these people in the example I given above said Vows before God but didn't mean it (such as a green card card marriage, or people getting drunk and running off to Vegas) and then divorced their spouse and marry another?

Thank you all again. :hug::hug::hug::hug::groupray::groupray::groupray:
You are using hermeneutics to try and apply the Scriptures directly to 21st Century Christians, without first doing an exegesis of them to see what Jesus and Paul really meant and how First Century believers would have understood them.

I believe, for that reason, your interpretation is faulty and shows that you don't know what Jesus and Paul really meant and what their main points were.
 
Upvote 0