Can a Christian woman divorce her husband if he commits adultery ?

Why do Christians want permission to divorce? God hates divorce.

QuestionQuest74 said:

The bible says if a woman commits adultery on her husband he’s free to divorce her is it the same the other way around ?

Click to expand...

Does the Bible use ‘adultery’ or some other word the translators just presumed to mean adultery? The latter.

QuestionQuest74 said:

The bible says if a woman commits adultery on her husband he’s free to divorce her is it the same the other way around ?

Click to expand...

Adultery is adultery regardless who did it. A sin in the eyes of God. If adultery is the grounds which men can divorce their wives the same should be accorded to the women. I don't see why not. It is best that the couple can work it out without divorcing. But if it is irreconcilable let the same divorce rights be available to both sides.

QuestionQuest74 said:

Because we are humans that make mistakes

Click to expand...

Do you mean, make mistakes in looking for an excuse to divorce?

Or do you mean, make mistakes in marrying the wrong person? Who are we to say whether we married the wrong person? If we marry someone, it is the right person, whether we regret it or not.

QuestionQuest74 said:

The bible says if a woman commits adultery on her husband he’s free to divorce her is it the same the other way around ?

Click to expand...

Ancient Judaism gave women little to no rights in marriage. Only a man could initiate a divorce. A woman could only beg her husband to divorce her. This is why we only read of divorces comming from the man in scripture. Today women have equal rights. Blessings.

QuestionQuest74 said:

The bible says if a woman commits adultery on her husband he’s free to divorce her is it the same the other way around ?

Click to expand...

AFAIK - there is no NT verse stating a woman is free to divorce if her husband commits adultery - I only know of the verse in Matthew 19:9 where a husband seems to be permitted to send his wife away because of sexual immorality (this is a different term and concept from adultery). I am not sure if one can apply symmetry here (that it also gives grounds for divorce to wives); maybe, but we don't know for sure.

And on top of that, the answer to your question depends on how you define adultery in this day and age.

The OT / Torah definition of adultery ONLY depends on the marital status of the woman, not of the man's - and the NT does not seem to change that.

That means that according to that Biblical definition a husband can only commit adultery if he is intimate with a woman who is married to another man. And in that case both would deserve the death penalty under Mosaic Law.

In the case where a husband sleeps with an unmarried women who is not his wife - it would not be a case of adultery in Biblical terms, but it still would be fornication (uncommitted / uncovenanted sex).

The OT did not demand exclusivity of the husband towards the wife (at least there are no laws enforcing that), but it did vice-versa. However the non-Jewish Christian church fairly early on changed that and took the view that the husband also had the obligation of exclusivity towards his wife, hereby changing the definition of 'adultery' from its original definition for the church from then on.

This can be illustrated by considering the history of David and Bathsheba. David's sin with her was due to the fact SHE was already married to Uriah, not because David at that time already had at least two other wives. Closely read the words of God spoken by the Prophet Nathan - it describes precisely what David's error was (2 Samuel 12:1-15).

Nevertheless if a man himself has vowed in the presence of God to remain exclusive to his wife - regardless of how that vow differed from the Biblical obligation of a husband, he would break that vow by being intimate with another woman.

QuestionQuest74 said:

The bible says if a woman commits adultery on her husband he’s free to divorce her is it the same the other way around ?

Click to expand...

Yes. He has broken his covenant with you. Mark 10:12. 1Cor 7:11

a woman can put away her husband. It does work both ways. Fornication is the only exception. A woman then can remarry..

QuestionQuest74 said:

The bible says if a woman commits adultery on her husband he’s free to divorce her is it the same the other way around ?

Click to expand...

Matthew 5:32 and 19:19 contain the "clause" for fornication but not adultery. It is believed to mean the case of a man and woman in a sexual relationship short of actual marriage. In such a case the two can separate but no divorce actually occurs.

Mark 10:11-12 are more on point:

Mar 10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.

Mar 10:12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

Verse 12 is likely meant to address gentile divorce, as under Jewish law a woman cannot initiate a divorce against her husband, as @Reluctant Theologian mentioned above. The early Church forbade divorce and remarriage, even in the case of adultery on either part. The Shepherd of Hermas gives a couple of different examples. One is the case of a wife who commits adultery without the knowledge of her husband. In that case the wife is guilty but the husband is innocent. But if the husband knows about it and continues to live with her he is also guilty. In that case the husband is to divorce his wife but remain unmarried. It is not divorce that is the sin but remarriage afterwards. The early Church also did not accept converts who were divorced and remarried. In that case the two were required to separate, but either could be reconciled with the previous spouse.

chevyontheriver said:

Does the Bible use ‘adultery’ or some other word the translators just presumed to mean adultery? The latter.

Click to expand...

I'm somewhat familiar with translation (more so with Greek than Hebrew). I, however am confused by your post. You seem to be questioning the translation of the Greek word μοιχεύω, transliterated moicheuó, as adultery. Here is Thayers.
"μοιχεύω; future μοιχεύσω; 1 aorist ἐμοίχευσα; passive, present participle μοιχευομένη; 1 aorist infinitive μοιχευθῆναι; (μοιχός); from Aristophanes and Xenophon down; the Sept. for נָאַף; to commit adultery;
a. absolutely (to be an adulterer)"

It is Strong's NT 3431 if you'd care to check it there. Englishman's Concordance is in total agreement. I guess my question is, what do you believe it should be translated as?

Godsunworthyservant said:

I'm somewhat familiar with translation (more so with Greek than Hebrew). I, however am confused by your post. You seem to be questioning the translation of the Greek word μοιχεύω, transliterated moicheuó, as adultery. Here is Thayers.
"μοιχεύω; future μοιχεύσω; 1 aorist ἐμοίχευσα; passive, present participle μοιχευομένη; 1 aorist infinitive μοιχευθῆναι; (μοιχός); from Aristophanes and Xenophon down; the Sept. for נָאַף; to commit adultery;
a. absolutely (to be an adulterer)"

It is Strong's NT 3431 if you'd care to check it there. Englishman's Concordance is in total agreement. I guess my question is, what do you believe it should be translated as?

Click to expand...

Nope. The Greek word μοιχεύω does mean adultery. Not contesting that at all. Contesting the translation of 'pornea' as 'adultery'. It seems pretentious to do that.

chevyontheriver said:

Nope. The Greek word μοιχεύω does mean adultery. Not contesting that at all. Contesting the translation of 'inappropriate contentea' as 'adultery'. It seems pretentious to do that.

Click to expand...

Sorry but the forum software messed up my post AGAIN by substituting in 'inappropriate content' for part of a Greek word. There is a thing that has a common enough name for dirty pictures and dirty movies. That word is now banned in these fora and they substitute in the phrase 'porn'. I don't know if they do that for the Greek letters or not. Pi-omicron-rho-nous-eta-alpha. Lets see what the software does to that.

chevyontheriver said:

Nope. The Greek word μοιχεύω does mean adultery. Not contesting that at all. Contesting the translation of 'inappropriate contentea' as 'adultery'. It seems pretentious to do that.

Click to expand...

My bad. You weren't clear, so it seems I jumped to an incorrect conclusion. I was going to assume you meant "porneia" but didn't go into that because that would have been a can of worms I wasn't prepared to untangle. I do however agree that "porneia" and "inappropriate contentea", being so broad, are two of the debatable translations. I chose μοιχᾶται (moichatai) because it's the word in Matthew and Mark, where the teachings of Christ on divorce and adultery are found, and because it does have the dual meaning relating to both men and women, again related to the original post. At any rate, it's good to see others who look a little deeper than their favorite English translation to try and get at the true meaning of such things.

UPDATE: Somehow the bot here changed my wording. When I write "PO" RN EIA" it changes it to "inappropriate contentea'. So I guess you'll have to take from the context which is which. It's ironic, while they change the transliteration, they don't change the Greek. For clarification, the first 2 are the ones that got changed. I think I'll ask the admins why.

QuestionQuest74 said:

Because we are humans that make mistakes

Click to expand...

But why do we seek permission for our mistakes? We all make mistakes, but too often, we try to look for reasons that those mistakes are really not sin and seek permission to continue them.

Godsunworthyservant said:

UPDATE: Somehow the bot here changed my wording. When I write "PO" RN EIA" it changes it to "inappropriate contentea'. So I guess you'll have to take from the context which is which. It's ironic, while they change the transliteration, they don't change the Greek. For clarification, the first 2 are the ones that got changed. I think I'll ask the admins why.

Click to expand...

It is aggravating. I don't know for sure what this newspeak is supposed to be protecting us from while it makes such a mess of the transition from oldspeak. It's like they are preventing us from some sexcrime thoughtcrime or something. I'll stop before I am sent to the joycamp.

chevyontheriver said:

It is aggravating. I don't know for sure what this newspeak is supposed to be protecting us from while it makes such a mess of the transition from oldspeak. It's like they are preventing us from some sexcrime thoughtcrime or something. I'll stop before I am sent to the joycamp.

Click to expand...

I messaged the admins to ask why in the hopes they can do something about it. I happened to notice it this time but wonder now how many times it may have happened before that I didn't catch. Could make one look kinda silly or worse give the wrong impression of what was really said.