A question about divorce
- Thread starter franky67
- Start date
- Status
I agree, except for the last part. People who are in such abusive relationships need to protect themselves from further abuse . . . and perhaps a civil divorce is necessary . .
However, whether or not one can remarry is dependent on whether or not the marriage that ended in civil divorce was ever joined by God.
If it was, then they are still joined by God and any remarriage would be auldtery . .
However, not all marriages are joined by God . . they can be joined by man . . . . There is nothing that says that what man has joined man can't put assunder.
In the cases of abusive spouses, even among baptized believers, it is possible that the union between them was never one joined by God in the first place.
.
Upvote
0
It is impossible to say unless one is able to determine that your first marriage was indeed joined by God and not merely by man. . . . .
.
Upvote
0
THANK YOU SO MUCH for saying this!
This is the concept of doing penance in Catholicism . .the process of repentance. . . .
Do you have a source from Jewish literature that describes this process of repentance? I have been in discussions with others about the fact that repentance is a process, not a mommentary thing, and it would be helpful to show this continuation of thought from Judaism to Early Chirstianity . . . .
It may or may not . . . .
.
Upvote
0
Therese,
I think we could start a whole other thread on "Are All Marriages Joined by God?
Yet isn't that the heart of the question here?
.
Upvote
0
4Christ2, thanks for sharing your story. You survived 25 years of it!!
Therese, thanks for showing a different angle of doctrine on this.
Therese, thanks for showing a different angle of doctrine on this.
Upvote
0
(Words of Jesus are in red. We will be judged by His Word when we stand before Him, not the opinions of men, churches or organizations)
Matthew 5: 31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32But 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.
Matthew 19:5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Matthew 19:9And 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.
Mark 10:7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 10And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. 11And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.
Luke 16:18Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
Romans 7:2For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man
1 Corinthians 7:39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.
Mark 6:17For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her. 18For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife.
11But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
Matthew 5: 31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32But 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.
Matthew 19:5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Matthew 19:9And 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.
Mark 10:7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 10And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. 11And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.
Luke 16:18Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
Romans 7:2For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man
1 Corinthians 7:39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.
Mark 6:17For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her. 18For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife.
1 Corinthians 7:10And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
Upvote
0
JimB
Legend
- Jul 12, 2004
- 26,337
- 1,595
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Thought I would add the following more-balanced article on this subject from GotQuestions.org. While faithful to the letter of scripture I think it is more balanced than some of the legalistic stuff I hear. I especially love the spirit of the last two verses that make this scripturally faithful answer more Christian than Pharisaical (IMO).
Question: What does the Bible say about divorce and remarriage?
Answer: First of all, no matter what view one takes in the issue of divorce it is important to remember the words of the Bible from Malachi 2:16a: I hate divorce, says the Lord God of Israel. [And my contention is that no one hates divorce more than someone who has been through one - jm.] According to the Bible, Gods plan is that marriage be a lifetime commitment. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate (Matthew 19:6). God realizes, though, that since a marriage involves two sinful human beings, divorce is going to occur. In the Old Testament, He laid down some laws in order to protect the rights of divorcees, especially women (Deuteronomy 24:1-4). Jesus pointed out that these laws were given because of the hardness of peoples hearts, not because they were Gods desire (Matthew 19:8).
The controversy over whether divorce and remarriage is allowed according to the Bible revolves primarily around Jesus words in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. The phrase except for marital unfaithfulness is the only thing in Scripture that possibly gives Gods permission for divorce and remarriage. Many interpreters understand this "exception clause" as referring to "marital unfaithfulness" during the "betrothal" period. In Jewish custom, a man and a woman were considered married even while they were still engaged betrothed. Immorality during this "betrothal" period would then be the only valid reason for a divorce.
However, the Greek word translated marital unfaithfulness is a word which can mean any form of sexual immorality. It is can mean fornication, prostitution, adultery, etc. Jesus is possibly saying that divorce is permissible if sexual immorality is committed. Sexual relations are such an integral part of the marital bond the two will become one flesh (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5; Ephesians 5:31). Therefore, a breaking of that bond by sexual relations outside of marriage might be a permissible reason for divorce. If so, Jesus also has remarriage in mind in this passage. The phrase and marries another (Matthew 19:9) indicates that divorce and remarriage are allowed in an instance of the exception clause, whatever it is interpreted to be. It is important to note that only the innocent party is allowed to remarry. Although it is not stated in the text, the allowance for remarriage after a divorce is Gods mercy for the one who was sinned against, not for the one who committed the sexual immorality. There may be instances where the "guilty party" is allowed to remarry - but no such concept is taught in this text.
Some understand 1 Corinthians 7:15 as another exception, allowing remarriage if an unbelieving spouse divorces a believer. However, the context does not mention remarriage, but only says a believer is not bound to continue a marriage if an unbelieving spouse wants to leave. Others claim that abuse (spousal or child) are valid reasons for divorce even though they are not listed as such in the Bible. While this may very well be the case, it is never wise to presume upon the Word of God.
Sometimes lost in the debate over the exception clause is the fact that whatever marital unfaithfulness means, it is an allowance for divorce, not a requirement for divorce. Even when adultery is committed a couple can, through Gods grace, learn to forgive and begin rebuilding their marriage. God has forgiven us of so much more. Surely we can follow His example and even forgive the sin of adultery (Ephesians 4:32). However, in many instances, a spouse is unrepentant and continues in sexual immorality. That is where Matthew 19:9 can possibly be applied. Many also look too quickly to remarriage after a divorce when God might desire them to remain single. God sometimes calls a person to be single so that their attention is not divided (1 Corinthians 7:32-35). Remarriage after a divorce may be an option in some circumstances, but that does not mean it is the only option.
It is distressing that the divorce rate among professing Christians is nearly as high as that of the unbelieving world. The Bible makes it abundantly clear that God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16) and that reconciliation and forgiveness should be the marks of a believers life (Luke 11:4; Ephesians 4:32). However, God recognizes that divorces will occur, even among His children. A divorced and/or remarried believer should not feel any less loved by God, even if their divorce and/or remarriage is not covered under the possible exception clause of Matthew 19:9. God often uses even the sinful disobedience of Christians to accomplish great good.
Answer: First of all, no matter what view one takes in the issue of divorce it is important to remember the words of the Bible from Malachi 2:16a: I hate divorce, says the Lord God of Israel. [And my contention is that no one hates divorce more than someone who has been through one - jm.] According to the Bible, Gods plan is that marriage be a lifetime commitment. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate (Matthew 19:6). God realizes, though, that since a marriage involves two sinful human beings, divorce is going to occur. In the Old Testament, He laid down some laws in order to protect the rights of divorcees, especially women (Deuteronomy 24:1-4). Jesus pointed out that these laws were given because of the hardness of peoples hearts, not because they were Gods desire (Matthew 19:8).
The controversy over whether divorce and remarriage is allowed according to the Bible revolves primarily around Jesus words in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. The phrase except for marital unfaithfulness is the only thing in Scripture that possibly gives Gods permission for divorce and remarriage. Many interpreters understand this "exception clause" as referring to "marital unfaithfulness" during the "betrothal" period. In Jewish custom, a man and a woman were considered married even while they were still engaged betrothed. Immorality during this "betrothal" period would then be the only valid reason for a divorce.
However, the Greek word translated marital unfaithfulness is a word which can mean any form of sexual immorality. It is can mean fornication, prostitution, adultery, etc. Jesus is possibly saying that divorce is permissible if sexual immorality is committed. Sexual relations are such an integral part of the marital bond the two will become one flesh (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5; Ephesians 5:31). Therefore, a breaking of that bond by sexual relations outside of marriage might be a permissible reason for divorce. If so, Jesus also has remarriage in mind in this passage. The phrase and marries another (Matthew 19:9) indicates that divorce and remarriage are allowed in an instance of the exception clause, whatever it is interpreted to be. It is important to note that only the innocent party is allowed to remarry. Although it is not stated in the text, the allowance for remarriage after a divorce is Gods mercy for the one who was sinned against, not for the one who committed the sexual immorality. There may be instances where the "guilty party" is allowed to remarry - but no such concept is taught in this text.
Some understand 1 Corinthians 7:15 as another exception, allowing remarriage if an unbelieving spouse divorces a believer. However, the context does not mention remarriage, but only says a believer is not bound to continue a marriage if an unbelieving spouse wants to leave. Others claim that abuse (spousal or child) are valid reasons for divorce even though they are not listed as such in the Bible. While this may very well be the case, it is never wise to presume upon the Word of God.
Sometimes lost in the debate over the exception clause is the fact that whatever marital unfaithfulness means, it is an allowance for divorce, not a requirement for divorce. Even when adultery is committed a couple can, through Gods grace, learn to forgive and begin rebuilding their marriage. God has forgiven us of so much more. Surely we can follow His example and even forgive the sin of adultery (Ephesians 4:32). However, in many instances, a spouse is unrepentant and continues in sexual immorality. That is where Matthew 19:9 can possibly be applied. Many also look too quickly to remarriage after a divorce when God might desire them to remain single. God sometimes calls a person to be single so that their attention is not divided (1 Corinthians 7:32-35). Remarriage after a divorce may be an option in some circumstances, but that does not mean it is the only option.
It is distressing that the divorce rate among professing Christians is nearly as high as that of the unbelieving world. The Bible makes it abundantly clear that God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16) and that reconciliation and forgiveness should be the marks of a believers life (Luke 11:4; Ephesians 4:32). However, God recognizes that divorces will occur, even among His children. A divorced and/or remarried believer should not feel any less loved by God, even if their divorce and/or remarriage is not covered under the possible exception clause of Matthew 19:9. God often uses even the sinful disobedience of Christians to accomplish great good.
~Jim
A father is someone who carries
pictures where his money used to be.
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
:o
This is just wrong! The Apostle Paul said to the church:
Is a lifestyle of adultery worth losing one's inheritance over? If the Bible showed us Christ then why turn from the rest of its teachings now! Do not follow the teachings of men but believe in the word of God:
Knowledge of the word of God are the guard-rails on the road to the kingdom.
Be filled with the word
.
Upvote
0
- Oct 23, 2003
- 16,711
- 1,132
- 52
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Again quoted with permission:
"But I Say Unto You" and Maketh Her an Adulteress
Matt 5:31-32
Let us carefully study Jesus statement, from which some have concluded that He changed the Law from the idea that a person who has been divorced MAY marry another, to the idea that MAY NOT marry another. The issue involves the question, DID JESUS CONTRADICT MOSES? I think we can all agree that He did not But we need to understand what He meant when he said, but I say unto you before we get to what he said in the text.
Mt 5:1 - And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: 2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, -3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven .
Let us note that in Matt 19 the setting is the Pharisees looking to entrap Jesus, but in this setting it is his disciples who came to the mountain to hear him.
What is the FIRST thing Jesus said (in this setting) that is relative to our study , besides to whom he is talking?
Answer: Jesus statement below:
The next passage that is relative to our study is verse 20.
Because it was the scribes and Pharisees, interpreters of the Law, with whom he was ABOUT to take issue.
Mt 5:21 - Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Ye have HEARD, from WHOM had they head? It SOUNDS like Jesus is taking issue with someone who had been saying something that is not exactly RIGHT? Moses' writings were inspired of God and therefore not something contrary to God's will.
(Barnes) By them of old time. This might be translated, to the ancients, referring to Moses and the prophets. But it is more probable that he here refers to the interpreters of the law and the prophets. Jesus did not set himself against the law of Moses, but against the false and pernicious interpretations of the law prevalent in his time.
27. Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28. but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Barnes: Ye have heard. Or, this is the common interpretation among the Jews. Jesus proceeds here to comment on some prevailing opinions among the Jews; to show that the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees was defective; and that men needed a better righteousness, or they could not be saved. He shows what he meant by that better righteousness, by showing that the common opinions of the scribes were erroneous.
Verses 27,28. Ye have heard--Thou shalt not commit adultery. Our Saviour in these verses explains the seventh commandment. It is probable that the Pharisees had explained this commandment as they had the sixth, as extending only to the external act; and that they regarded evil thoughts and a wanton imagination as of little consequence, or as not forbidden by the law. Our Saviour assures them that the commandment did not regard the external act merely, but the secrets of the heart, and the movements of the eye. That they who indulged a wanton desire; that they who looked on a woman to increase their lust, have already, in the sight of God, violated the commandment, and committed adultery in the heart.
With this explanation is it not reasonable to conclude that Jesus was expounding on the Law, rather than making NEW law?
33. Again, ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34. but I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by the heaven, for it is the throne of God;
(Barnes) Verse 33. Thou shalt not forswear thyself. Christ here proceeds to correct another false interpretation of the law. The law respecting oaths is found in #Le 19:12 De 23:23. By those laws, men were forbid to perjure themselves, or to forswear, that is, swear falsely.
Perform unto the Lord. Perform literally, really, and religiously, what is promised in an oath.
Thine oaths. An oath is a solemn affirmation, or declaration, made with an appeal to God for the truth of what is affirmed, and imprecating his vengeance, and renouncing his favour, if what is affirmed is false. A false oath is called perjury; or, as in this place, forswearing.
"It appears, however, from this passage, as well as from the ancient writings of the Jewish Rabbins, that while they professedly adhered to the law, they had introduced a number of oaths in common conversation, and oaths which they by no means considered as binding. For example, they would swear by the temple, by the head, by heaven, by the earth. So long as they kept from swearing by the name Jehovah, and so long as they observed the oaths publicly taken, they seemed to consider all others as allowable, and allowedly broken. This is the abuse which Christ wished to correct. It was the practice of swearing in common conversation, and especially swearing by created things. To do this, he said that they were mistaken in their views of the sacredness of such oaths. They were very closely connected with God; and to trifle with them was a species of trifling with God. Heaven is his throne; the earth his footstool; Jerusalem his peculiar abode; the head was made by him, and was so much under his control, that we could not make one hair white or black. To swear by these things, therefore, was to treat irreverently objects created by God; and could not be without guilt."
(Barnes) Verses 34,35. Swear not at all. That is, in the manner which he proceeds to specify. Swear not in any of the common and profane ways customary at that time.
Thus, Jesus was NOT saying Moses said THIS, but I AM CHANGING it to THIS. He was saying, MEN have been saying this but Im explaining what the Law is and showing how men are out of harmony with it.
31. It was said also, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: (ASV)
Who was going about saying "Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement"? ANSWER: The Jews who were following their own traditions (Talmid). Because of their unfaithness to their wives in putting them out the house and acting as if the marriage was nonexistent, they were required (COMMANDED) to give the bill of divorcement. This command is falsely viewed by many as PERMISSION by God through Moses to divorce. The Jews had looked upon the command of Moses as permission to divorce just give her a bill of divorcement. This was what Jesus sought to correct, rather than to change the Law of Moses.
Barnes The husband was directed, if he put his wife away, to give her a bill of divorce, that is, a certificate of the fact that she had been his wife, and that he had dissolved the marriage. There was considerable difference of opinion among the Jews for what causes the husband was permitted to do this.
Again, and as we learn from studying Deut. 24:1-4; Mal. 2:15, the husband was not permitted to act treacherously against his wife at all, but was rather FORBIDDEN TO SO DO. The command was for the wife to release her to marry another.
Did Jesus take sides with one of the Jewish schools? It is more likely that BOTH schools were in error, and that Jesus did not take sides, but merely explained the passage in light of what it was intended to accomplish?
32. But I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery.
First, IF Jesus is saying everyone that DIVORCES his wife maketh her an adulteress, he is definitely contradicting MOSES. If we can see and admit that Jesus did not and could not possibly have done that, then we must try to understand this passage in a way that harmonizes with the idea that MOSES allowed divorced persons to marry. This concept is in harmony with proper hermeneutics.
It is my understanding that putteth away describes part of the divorce process, but does not imply the word divorce where the whole legal process is understood. The putting away, without giving the bill or divorce, is what Jesus here had in mind. Everyone that does it, saving for the cause of fornication, makes his spouse an adulteress.
The exception to causing a wife to be an adulteress, if put away, is if it is done because of fornication (not unfaithfulness, not adultery specifically, as often affirmed,), but because fornication is being committed in the relationship due to it not being legal/scriptural exp. brothers wife, (Herod Mt 14:3,4); Fathers wife (1Cor5:1) forbidden foreign Gen. 28:6 of Canaanites.
The "exception clause" explains that if a man puts away his wife in a case where the marriage is not legal/scriptural, which is to end the relationship by permanent separation, it DOES NOT cause the woman to be an adulteress. Naturally, she could marry and the one she married would not be guilty of adultery, as would be the case if one is merely "put away" and not given the "bill of divorement".
Maketh Her an Adulteress
Four possible interpretations:
1) She is in fact an adulteress because Jesus said it. She does not have to do anything she will be caused to be an adulteress if she is put away (divorced is the thinking).
2) She is viewed as an adulteress, but is not in fact an adulterous.
3) She will likely go and be with another man and in FACT be an adulterous.
4) If one merely put his wife out of the house, he makes it impossible for her to carry out her duties as a wife. She commits adultery adultery meaning, failing to live up to the covenant or breaking covenant, Covenant breaking etc.
http://www.totalhealth.bz/divorce-and-remarriage-adultery.htm
"But I Say Unto You" and Maketh Her an Adulteress
Matt 5:31-32
Let us carefully study Jesus statement, from which some have concluded that He changed the Law from the idea that a person who has been divorced MAY marry another, to the idea that MAY NOT marry another. The issue involves the question, DID JESUS CONTRADICT MOSES? I think we can all agree that He did not But we need to understand what He meant when he said, but I say unto you before we get to what he said in the text.
Mt 5:1 - And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: 2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, -3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven .
Let us note that in Matt 19 the setting is the Pharisees looking to entrap Jesus, but in this setting it is his disciples who came to the mountain to hear him.
What is the FIRST thing Jesus said (in this setting) that is relative to our study , besides to whom he is talking?
Answer: Jesus statement below:
Mt 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
So, before Jesus says ANYTHING about the treatment of wives (putting away) he makes it clear that he is not going to SAY ANYTHING that should be interpreted to mean that he is CHANGING what was in the Law of Moses.The next passage that is relative to our study is verse 20.
Mt 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Why is this passage relevant?Because it was the scribes and Pharisees, interpreters of the Law, with whom he was ABOUT to take issue.
Mt 5:21 - Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Ye have HEARD, from WHOM had they head? It SOUNDS like Jesus is taking issue with someone who had been saying something that is not exactly RIGHT? Moses' writings were inspired of God and therefore not something contrary to God's will.
(Barnes) By them of old time. This might be translated, to the ancients, referring to Moses and the prophets. But it is more probable that he here refers to the interpreters of the law and the prophets. Jesus did not set himself against the law of Moses, but against the false and pernicious interpretations of the law prevalent in his time.
27. Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28. but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Barnes: Ye have heard. Or, this is the common interpretation among the Jews. Jesus proceeds here to comment on some prevailing opinions among the Jews; to show that the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees was defective; and that men needed a better righteousness, or they could not be saved. He shows what he meant by that better righteousness, by showing that the common opinions of the scribes were erroneous.
Verses 27,28. Ye have heard--Thou shalt not commit adultery. Our Saviour in these verses explains the seventh commandment. It is probable that the Pharisees had explained this commandment as they had the sixth, as extending only to the external act; and that they regarded evil thoughts and a wanton imagination as of little consequence, or as not forbidden by the law. Our Saviour assures them that the commandment did not regard the external act merely, but the secrets of the heart, and the movements of the eye. That they who indulged a wanton desire; that they who looked on a woman to increase their lust, have already, in the sight of God, violated the commandment, and committed adultery in the heart.
With this explanation is it not reasonable to conclude that Jesus was expounding on the Law, rather than making NEW law?
33. Again, ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34. but I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by the heaven, for it is the throne of God;
(Barnes) Verse 33. Thou shalt not forswear thyself. Christ here proceeds to correct another false interpretation of the law. The law respecting oaths is found in #Le 19:12 De 23:23. By those laws, men were forbid to perjure themselves, or to forswear, that is, swear falsely.
Perform unto the Lord. Perform literally, really, and religiously, what is promised in an oath.
Thine oaths. An oath is a solemn affirmation, or declaration, made with an appeal to God for the truth of what is affirmed, and imprecating his vengeance, and renouncing his favour, if what is affirmed is false. A false oath is called perjury; or, as in this place, forswearing.
"It appears, however, from this passage, as well as from the ancient writings of the Jewish Rabbins, that while they professedly adhered to the law, they had introduced a number of oaths in common conversation, and oaths which they by no means considered as binding. For example, they would swear by the temple, by the head, by heaven, by the earth. So long as they kept from swearing by the name Jehovah, and so long as they observed the oaths publicly taken, they seemed to consider all others as allowable, and allowedly broken. This is the abuse which Christ wished to correct. It was the practice of swearing in common conversation, and especially swearing by created things. To do this, he said that they were mistaken in their views of the sacredness of such oaths. They were very closely connected with God; and to trifle with them was a species of trifling with God. Heaven is his throne; the earth his footstool; Jerusalem his peculiar abode; the head was made by him, and was so much under his control, that we could not make one hair white or black. To swear by these things, therefore, was to treat irreverently objects created by God; and could not be without guilt."
(Barnes) Verses 34,35. Swear not at all. That is, in the manner which he proceeds to specify. Swear not in any of the common and profane ways customary at that time.
Thus, Jesus was NOT saying Moses said THIS, but I AM CHANGING it to THIS. He was saying, MEN have been saying this but Im explaining what the Law is and showing how men are out of harmony with it.
31. It was said also, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: (ASV)
Who was going about saying "Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement"? ANSWER: The Jews who were following their own traditions (Talmid). Because of their unfaithness to their wives in putting them out the house and acting as if the marriage was nonexistent, they were required (COMMANDED) to give the bill of divorcement. This command is falsely viewed by many as PERMISSION by God through Moses to divorce. The Jews had looked upon the command of Moses as permission to divorce just give her a bill of divorcement. This was what Jesus sought to correct, rather than to change the Law of Moses.
Barnes The husband was directed, if he put his wife away, to give her a bill of divorce, that is, a certificate of the fact that she had been his wife, and that he had dissolved the marriage. There was considerable difference of opinion among the Jews for what causes the husband was permitted to do this.
Again, and as we learn from studying Deut. 24:1-4; Mal. 2:15, the husband was not permitted to act treacherously against his wife at all, but was rather FORBIDDEN TO SO DO. The command was for the wife to release her to marry another.
Did Jesus take sides with one of the Jewish schools? It is more likely that BOTH schools were in error, and that Jesus did not take sides, but merely explained the passage in light of what it was intended to accomplish?
32. But I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery.
First, IF Jesus is saying everyone that DIVORCES his wife maketh her an adulteress, he is definitely contradicting MOSES. If we can see and admit that Jesus did not and could not possibly have done that, then we must try to understand this passage in a way that harmonizes with the idea that MOSES allowed divorced persons to marry. This concept is in harmony with proper hermeneutics.
It is my understanding that putteth away describes part of the divorce process, but does not imply the word divorce where the whole legal process is understood. The putting away, without giving the bill or divorce, is what Jesus here had in mind. Everyone that does it, saving for the cause of fornication, makes his spouse an adulteress.
The exception to causing a wife to be an adulteress, if put away, is if it is done because of fornication (not unfaithfulness, not adultery specifically, as often affirmed,), but because fornication is being committed in the relationship due to it not being legal/scriptural exp. brothers wife, (Herod Mt 14:3,4); Fathers wife (1Cor5:1) forbidden foreign Gen. 28:6 of Canaanites.
The "exception clause" explains that if a man puts away his wife in a case where the marriage is not legal/scriptural, which is to end the relationship by permanent separation, it DOES NOT cause the woman to be an adulteress. Naturally, she could marry and the one she married would not be guilty of adultery, as would be the case if one is merely "put away" and not given the "bill of divorement".
Maketh Her an Adulteress
Four possible interpretations:
1) She is in fact an adulteress because Jesus said it. She does not have to do anything she will be caused to be an adulteress if she is put away (divorced is the thinking).
2) She is viewed as an adulteress, but is not in fact an adulterous.
3) She will likely go and be with another man and in FACT be an adulterous.
4) If one merely put his wife out of the house, he makes it impossible for her to carry out her duties as a wife. She commits adultery adultery meaning, failing to live up to the covenant or breaking covenant, Covenant breaking etc.
http://www.totalhealth.bz/divorce-and-remarriage-adultery.htm
Upvote
0
- Oct 23, 2003
- 16,711
- 1,132
- 52
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
1 Co 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.
Go on:
27 Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek a separation. Are you free of a wife? Then do not look for a wife. 28 If you marry, however, you do not sin, nor does an unmarried woman sin if she marries; but such people will experience affliction in their earthly life, and I would like to spare you that.
Go on:
27 Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek a separation. Are you free of a wife? Then do not look for a wife. 28 If you marry, however, you do not sin, nor does an unmarried woman sin if she marries; but such people will experience affliction in their earthly life, and I would like to spare you that.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
