Should A Christian Man Marry A Divorced Woman?

SimpleLiving2019 said:

The title of this thread is "Should a Christian man marry a divorced woman?" The scriptural answer is no, if he does then he commits adultery.

Click to expand...

Yes, quite right, the record of what Jesus said on the Mount suggests 'no'.

But Jesus, the God of fairness and justice, would say that: "the man who divorces his wife with no justifiable (to God) reason, and marries another commits adultery, and the woman that marries him commits adultery. The woman that has been wrongfully divorced is free to marry again assuming it's to an eligible male, she will not be committing adultery, nor will the man that marries her".

Tony B said:

Yes, quite right, the record of what Jesus said on the Mount suggests 'no'.

But Jesus, the God of fairness and justice, would say that: "the man who divorces his wife with no justifiable (to God) reason, and marries another commits adultery, and the woman that marries him commits adultery. The woman that has been wrongfully divorced is free to remarry an eligible male, she will not be committing adultery, nor will the man that marries her".

Click to expand...

What I think Jesus actually says--taking all He says into account--is that the woman does, indeed commit adultery because the original marriage is, indeed, adulterated, and the second husband is also involved in the adulteration of the first marriage...but it's the first husband who is held fully and solely guilty of the adulteration of that marriage, having been the one to push the others into sin.

,

RDKirk said:

What I think Jesus actually says--taking all He says into account--is that the woman does, indeed commit adultery because the original marriage is, indeed, adulterated, and the second husband is also involved in the adulteration of the first marriage...but it's the first husband who is held fully and solely guilty of the adulteration of that marriage, having been the one to push the others into sin.

Click to expand...

Some good points there, so long as this fellow who walks along and finds this broken marriage keeps that in mind, if he marries her, she commits adultery, he commits adultery. She can perhaps find some peace if she was wrongly divorced, knowing she was “pushed into sin” and assign the guilt to her husband who did her wrongly, not sure how much this fellow who wandered along was pushed at all though, perhaps he can find wiggle room by laying all guilt upon the husband who put her away wrongly and empowers himself in this manner. Dangerous territory for sure (and let’s not even get started on the hapless fellow who walks along and finds a divorced wife...who was rightfully put away, or who wrongfully divorced her husband).

Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

SimpleLiving2019 said:

These two scriptures, taken together, do indeed show there is a different standard for the divorced husband and wife on the matter of remarriage.

Click to expand...

You're incorrect, the standard is the same.

It was assumed that the divorced wife would get remarried. It was a cultural thing, and I'll leave it to you to study the culture of that time if you don't already know that. So with that in mind, look at 5:32

Jesus is actually pretty clear, so I'm surprised there is so much debate around this. He is saying that when the woman gets remarried, if the reason for the divorce from the previous spouse was not adultery, then she is committing adultery. This directly implies that if the reason for the divorce was adultery, that she would not be committing adultery when she gets remarried.

Likewise, look at 19:9. Jesus says that if a man divorces his wife and remarries, that if the reason for the divorce from his first spouse was not adultery, he is committing adultery.

Same standard, same rules, same outcome for both spouses. And here's why:

Marriage was the very first covenant instituted by God, it even preceded the law. Marriage between a man and a woman is the most intimate, deep, relational experience that two people can have this side of heaven. The marriage covenant between two Christians is bound together by the Holy Spirit.

With that basic foundation, it's easy to understand. Only physical adultery is capable of severing the one flesh covenant that is formed by marriage. Jesus is clear, if adultery is not the cause of the separation, adultery is the result of remarriage (for either husband or wife).

Why is adultery the outcome? Simple, because while they may get a divorce on paper, if the divorce was not due to adultery, then they are still married in the eyes of the Lord. A single woman does not commit adultery when marrying a single man.

However, if adultery was the reason for the divorce, then because adultery is the one action that can sever the one flesh covenant - adultery does not occur at remarriage.

It's not actually that complicated.

SimpleLiving2019 said:

The title of this thread is "Should a Christian man marry a divorced woman?" The scriptural answer is no, if he does then he commits adultery.

Click to expand...

Again incorrect. The exception clause exists for the explicit reason to permit remarriage without adultery being the result. Also, you ignore Paul's teaching in I Corinthians where he permits remarriage in the instance where a non-believing spouse divorces a believing spouse.

I had written we agreed on one point SPF, but when I really examine what is going on in your thought pattern, I don’t think we do agree on it like how you had meant it, and I expounded my thoughts enough to not repeat. (This is an edit)

One thing that does enter my mind here (not to you specifically), is it seems to be than many think the most important issue to the Lord on this matter is to make sure everyone has another husband or wife once they have divorced. I don’t think that is the case at all. Off of this thread subject, but personally what I feel the Lord has spoken to my heart in MY case is whether or not I remarry is optional, so I can’t make it my primary life focus point, he has reminded me that I really don’t highly desire more children, though I could raise more and would consider them a blessing, and also I feel like he is ok with one more marriage but no more, so even if my future wife were to die, I believe the Lord would have me not remarry after that, not as a law, but as me following his will for MY life.

SimpleLiving2019 said:

is it seems to be than many think the most important issue to the Lord on this matter is to make sure everyone has another husband or wife once they have divorced.

Click to expand...

I don't know of anyone who thinks that. Sounds like you may be projecting.

SimpleLiving2019 said:

but personally what I feel the Lord has spoken to my heart in MY case is whether or not I remarry is optional

Click to expand...

Well YOUR case is not special. In other words, unless you or the wife you divorced have had sex with someone else, then assuming you were both Christians when you got married, you're still actually married in God's eyes.

Again, the only action capable of severing the one flesh covenant between two Christians, is adultery.

SimpleLiving2019 said:

but when I really examine what is going on in your thought pattern, I don’t think we do agree on it

Click to expand...

You're welcome to let me know where you incorrectly disagree and maybe I can help educate you.

SPF said:

I don't know of anyone who thinks that. Sounds like you may be projecting.

Click to expand...

Perhaps

But it is a good reminder to all anyway.

SPF said:

Well YOUR case is not special.

Click to expand...

Actually, once you get past what is permitted and not permitted strictly. You will see that MY case is special. The Lord has a certain plan and a certain will that is only for me...as I explained...

And also, my mother tells me I am special too, so there’s that...

SimpleLiving2019 said:

Actually, once you get past what is permitted and not permitted strictly. You will see that MY case is special. The Lord has a certain plan and a certain will that is only for me...as I explained...

Click to expand...

Sure, but whatever that plan is for you, it won't contradict Scripture.

SPF said:

Sure, but whatever that plan is for you, it won't contradict Scripture.

Click to expand...

I agree with you on that, and that point is a good one for this thread.

RDKirk said:

What I think Jesus actually says--taking all He says into account--is that the woman does, indeed commit adultery because the original marriage is, indeed, adulterated, and the second husband is also involved in the adulteration of the first marriage...but it's the first husband who is held fully and solely guilty of the adulteration of that marriage, having been the one to push the others into sin.

Click to expand...

No she doesn't. You could take this slant on it, but it still infers God is a punisher of the innocent, and He isn't.

Tony B said:

No she doesn't. You could take this slant on it, but it still infers God is a punisher of the innocent, and He isn't.

Click to expand...

Only if you look at refusing her to remarry as only a punishment. Perhaps this is God’s way of leaving room for restoration, and unless your earthly laws forbid it, even if the husband did remarry, nothing in God’s sight would prevent him from restoring the marriage with his original wife as well, so long as she had remained single while they were apart. And as I had mentioned in a previous post, it is not always God’s will that a person has a spouse. We also have a very modern western lens with which we read scripture, but the lens really has no place there, and is not going to have a place when Jesus returns either.

Perhaps the bigger issue God sees than denying her remarriage is what we have going on today with divorce and remarriage. It is completely out of control since the cultural revolution. It cannot go on like this. The first step to get out of a hole is to stop digging, and perhaps this was God’s way to halt the progression of a society down this path.

Tony B said:

No she doesn't. You could take this slant on it, but it still infers God is a punisher of the innocent, and He isn't.

Click to expand...

I said: "...but it's the first husband who is held fully and solely guilty of the adulteration of that marriage, having been the one to push the others into sin."

What punishment of the innocent are you talking about?

SimpleLiving2019 said:

Only if you look at refusing her to remarry as only a punishment."

Click to expand...

Very few of us have that gift of celibacy. To deny a divorced person the right to marry again when they are the innocent party of a wrongful divorce, is just plainly nonsensical and illogical. It is also contradictory to The Spirit of God that strives to protect the innocent, and will bestow His wrath upon people that threaten their welfare, in particular if that threat is levied at one of His own children.

People, if we are going to teach others God's ways, we better get them right. And there are two things that must happen for you to be able to do that. Firstly, your spirit which is dead to God, must be brought alive to God by Him. That is the only way you can have the indwelling of The Holy Spirit, and He is essential to you for discerning spiritual truths. Secondly, you must learn about/get a clear understanding of The character of The Holy Spirit, He will reveal that to you, because without that you will often make judgements based on your own legal understanding, which may well be out of tune with His.

Tv

RDKirk said:

I said: "...but it's the first husband who is held fully and solely guilty of the adulteration of that marriage, having been the one to push the others into sin."

What punishment of the innocent are you talking about?

Click to expand...

Because even though the take is that the guilt lies solely on the husband who wrongly divorced his wife, the inferrence that the woman is an adulterer if she marries again either puts her into a life of misery here on earth (if she is one that has a need for husbandly companionship), or to an existence of misery in eternity which she will have if she dies as an adulterer. The poor lady is on a hiding to nothing all round...that doesn't seem to be the actions of a God that cares for the innocent and vulnerable.

I understand the logic behind your suggestion, but taking it in whole it seems contradictory to a just God that punishes the evil and rewards the good.

Tony B said:

Tv


Because even though the take is that the guilt lies solely on the husband who wrongly divorced his wife, the inferrence that the woman is an adulterer if she marries again either puts her into a life of misery here on earth (if she is one that has a need for husbandly companionship), or to an existence of misery in eternity which she will have if she dies as an adulterer.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. Do you think that when Jesus said, "...If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to sin..." that His intention was to subject "these little ones" to a life of misery here on earth or an existence of misery in eternity?

No. Jesus clearly points out that "these little ones" did, indeed, commit the sin that someone led them into...but He just as clearly points out that all the guilty--all the "misery"--is soley upon the person who led them into sin.

RDKirk said:

No, it doesn't. Do you think that when Jesus said, "...If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to sin..." that His intention was to subject "these little ones" to a life of misery here on earth or an existence of misery in eternity?

Click to expand...

You could adjudge it that way if you felt God has no control over the life and outcome of the 'little one' that sinned. He has, and He will lead that little one to repentance if possible. Also, is it not written that “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.”

But as for the one that caused that little one to sin, it may well have been better for them that they had not even been born.

Even though I can see why one may draw similar conclusions for the two scenarios, I still can't see how a person that is innocent of a sin can be ostracised or in anyway punished for it, we have a Creator and God Who is the source of all wisdom and goodness, and Who would not mistreat someone that way.

Tony B said:

You could adjudge it that way if you felt God has no control over the life and outcome of the 'little one' that sinned. He has, and He will lead that little one to repentance if possible. Also, is it not written that “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.”

Click to expand...

Since you and I both know that, why the debate?

SimpleLiving2019 said:

Only if you look at refusing her to remarry as only a punishment. Perhaps this is God’s way of leaving room for restoration, and unless your earthly laws forbid it, even if the husband did remarry, nothing in God’s sight would prevent him from restoring the marriage with his original wife as well, so long as she had remained single while they were apart.

Click to expand...

I...
...what?

How would he restore his previous marriage with his first wife, if he had remarried? Are you advocating another divorce, from his second wife? Or are you advocating polygamy? Or are you proposing some other scenario here?

RDKirk said:

Since you and I both know that, why the debate?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it a debate, I would call it a clarification so that a 3rd party dropping in on the discussion would be clear on how our compassionate God would deal with the innocent parties to wrongful divorces.

It could be that we are merely talking semantics here, but knowing what we humans are like, once someone is labelled with something then they are adjudged as being the label irrespective of reality, and can be wrongfully judged and prejudiced against. I'm not saying you would do that, in fact I doubt that you would.