Divorce and Remarriage

[PollyJetix]

What if you are wrong, Polly? You could be convincing people to sin against God with liberality.

And that's how dramatic my freedom was, when I found the truth.
When the Truth shall make you free, you shall be free indeed.
There's no question in the mind of one who has been made free by Truth.

No, this is not a backlash against Mennonite teachings. I remain faithful to what I see in the Word of God, no matter who stands with or against what I see in it.

What you are saying, is something that makes no sense.
You are saying that an adulterer remains perpetually married to the one he sinned against.
Yet, the Lord says clearly that if one is sinned against, they are free to remarry.
(Except it be for fornication.)

Which creates a very strange marriage.
A marriage where only one is still married to the other.

I believe Paul spoke precisely, and he spoke under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.
He spoke to 4 groups.
The first one was to the "unmarried" and to the widows.
The word "unmarried" is defined for us only a few verses further down, where Paul used it to speak of one only SEPARATED from her husband.

Virgins were addressed separately. Therefore, "the unmarried" did not include virgins.

Paul also said to "the rest" that they were NO LONGER UNDER BONDAGE to a marriage where the unbeliever (an adulterer qualifies as such) has departed from the marriage.

And to wrap up the discussion, Paul says that if one is loosed from a wife (Greek word means 'broken') and marries another wife, he has not sinned.

 

[1stcenturylady]

And that's how dramatic my freedom was, when I found the truth.
When the Truth shall make you free, you shall be free indeed.
There's no question in the mind of one who has been made free by Truth.

No, this is not a backlash against Mennonite teachings. I remain faithful to what I see in the Word of God, no matter who stands with or against what I see in it.

What you are saying, is something that makes no sense.
You are saying that an adulterer remains perpetually married to the one he sinned against.
Yet, the Lord says clearly that if one is sinned against, they are free to remarry.
(Except it be for fornication.)

Which creates a very strange marriage.
A marriage where only one is still married to the other.

I believe Paul spoke precisely, and he spoke under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.
He spoke to 4 groups.
The first one was to the "unmarried" and to the widows.
The word "unmarried" is defined for us only a few verses further down, where Paul used it to speak of one only SEPARATED from her husband.

Virgins were addressed separately. Therefore, "the unmarried" did not include virgins.

Paul also said to "the rest" that they were NO LONGER UNDER BONDAGE to a marriage where the unbeliever (an adulterer qualifies as such) has departed from the marriage.

And to wrap up the discussion, Paul says that if one is loosed from a wife (Greek word means 'broken') and marries another wife, he has not sinned.

Polly, I copied this from the dating someone divorced post, that I had written to you.

If the Old Testament was still the covenant, that adulterer would be dead, and their spouse a widow free to remarry.

In God's eyes it is the same, except the punishment is now His to render. That is why this conundrum exists in human reasoning. You are not looking at it from God's viewpoint. When God releases you from the covenant of marriage, it is because the other person in the covenant is dead. This is where the Mennonites are wrong. You can't go back to the dead. That would be an abomination.

 

[PollyJetix]

The New Covenant frees us from the condemnation of the Law.
Suppose a man commits adultery, and divorces his Christian wife, and marries his lover. They have a few young children.

The Christian wife is free. She finds another man, and remarries.

Now, suppose that adulterer is born again.
He realizes the sin of his adultery and repents.
And God... does what?

God forgives and FORGETS.
He wipes the slate completely clean.
He CANNOT REMEMBER that this man is an adulterer.
He no longer sees that former wife as still married to this newborn believer.
(She's married to someone else now!)

Now, are you telling me that because of a sin that God cannot remember, this man is sentenced to not only divorce his wife and abandon his children, but also to live celibate for the rest of his life??

 

[1stcenturylady]

The New Covenant frees us from the condemnation of the Law.
Suppose a man commits adultery, and divorces his Christian wife, and marries his lover. They have a few young children.

The Christian wife is free. She finds another man, and remarries.

Now, suppose that adulterer is born again.
He realizes the sin of his adultery and repents.
And God... does what?

God forgives and FORGETS.
He wipes the slate completely clean.
He CANNOT REMEMBER that this man is an adulterer.
He no longer sees that former wife as still married to this newborn believer.
(She's married to someone else now!)

Now, are you telling me that because of a sin that God cannot remember, this man is sentenced to not only divorce his wife and abandon his children, but also to live celibate for the rest of his life??

You're right. The problem is, not many love God more than their lust for their mistress, and NEVER truly repent. What then in the eyes of God?

But you are referring to a non-Christian who divorces his Christian wife, and marries another, then later becomes born again. No matter what one has done BEFORE they become converted, they are a new creature, and they are then both free. She because she was the innocent party, and he because he wasn't a Christian before he divorced her.

 

[PollyJetix]

You're right. The problem is, not many love God more than their lust for their mistress, and NEVER truly repent. What then in the eyes of God?

But you are referring to a non-Christian who divorces his Christian wife, and marries another, then later becomes born again. No matter what one has done BEFORE they become converted, they are a new creature, and they are then both free. She because she was the innocent party, and he because he wasn't a Christian before he divorced her.

OH! I never heard that angle from you before.
So if he was not a Christian when he divorced his Christian wife, and remarries... then becomes born again... he starts with a clean slate?

That's exactly what I have been saying all along.

However, ...
I take it just one step further.
I contend that no true Christian will abuse, neglect, or betray a faithful wife. Even if she is not a Christian. Therefore, to betray a faithful wife through adultery/divorce is to deny the faith.

As 1 Timothy 5:8 says...
"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

The implications of this fit hand-in-glove with I Cor 7.

 

[1stcenturylady]

OH! I never heard that angle from you before.
So if he was not a Christian when he divorced his Christian wife, and remarries... then becomes born again... he starts with a clean slate?

That's exactly what I have been saying all along.

However, ...
I take it just one step further.
I contend that no true Christian will abuse, neglect, or betray a faithful wife. Even if she is not a Christian. Therefore, to betray a faithful wife through adultery/divorce is to deny the faith.

As 1 Timothy 5:8 says...
"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

The implications of this fit hand-in-glove with I Cor 7.

Unfortunately, that is not one of the things that Jesus gave as an exception - just sexual infidelity. I referred to Peter with another poster before.

Some miss the point of this passage because of the chapter break:

1 Peter 2 and 3.

2:18 Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh. 19 For this is commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering wrongfully. 20 For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God......3:1 Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, 2 when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I don't understand why you took issue with Phil. He was agreeing with the fact that my husband and his mistress were living in perpetual adultery.

1. They divorced their spouses in order to marry each other.

2. They had no biblical cause.

3. They never repented.

There has to be an understanding of why Paul brought up the subject to the Corinthians. This was because Corinthian Christian males had this idea that it was more spiritual to be single, so many of them were divorcing their wives for that reason. Paul saw this was wrong, so he gave that teaching about divorce. He never gave any teaching about what a person should do if their spouse divorced him or her. In fact, there is no mention of that anywhere, either by Jesus or Paul. I believe that is would go against the justice of God for the innocent party to be punished along with the guilty one. Someone who is deserted or cuckolded by an unfaithful spouse is a victim and therefore should be seen as such. Anyone who teaches that the victim of a divorce can never be remarried is perverting the Scripture and basing his teaching on silence. In fact, they are actually adding to the Scripture.

I used to have the attitude that the guilty partner was in a position of being not right with God until I heard the testimony from a friend who divorced her partner for the simple reason that she did not to be married to him any longer. She went through extreme guilt about that and was running away from God. Then she had a vision of God running after her crying, "Stop. Stop! Let me forgive you!" Once I heard that testimony, any judgmental attitudes about divorce and remarriage left me, because I learned what God's attitude is toward those who, for whatever reason, are unable to keep to a certain standard.

A lack of repentance doesn't worry God, because He runs after people so He can forgive them. This shows the wonderful mercy, grace and love of God toward those who fall from grace. We tend to judge those who fall from grace and condemn them, God continues to love them and runs after them to bring His forgiveness to them. That's the difference between us religious folks and God. As we become more Christlike, we learn more about the extent of God's love toward us and those need His love more than we do.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

What if you are wrong, Polly? You could be convincing people to sin against God with liberality.

Paul made allowance for that by giving the unbelieving partner permission to leave the marriage which would allow the other partner to marry again. But the believing partner did not have the freedom to leave the marriage if the unbelieving partner chose to stay and continue to love her. Paul says that a believing partner can greatly influence an unbelieving one, and who knows? The unbelieving one could be converted to Christ. There are many testimonies to show that this can happen more frequently than we think.

 

[1stcenturylady]

There has to be an understanding of why Paul brought up the subject to the Corinthians. This was because Corinthian Christian males had this idea that it was more spiritual to be single, so many of them were divorcing their wives for that reason. Paul saw this was wrong, so he gave that teaching about divorce. He never gave any teaching about what a person should do if their spouse divorced him or her. In fact, there is no mention of that anywhere, either by Jesus or Paul. I believe that is would go against the justice of God for the innocent party to be punished along with the guilty one. Someone who is deserted or cuckolded by an unfaithful spouse is a victim and therefore should be seen as such. Anyone who teaches that the victim of a divorce can never be remarried is perverting the Scripture and basing his teaching on silence. In fact, they are actually adding to the Scripture.

I used to have the attitude that the guilty partner was in a position of being not right with God until I heard the testimony from a friend who divorced her partner for the simple reason that she did not to be married to him any longer. She went through extreme guilt about that and was running away from God. Then she had a vision of God running after her crying, "Stop. Stop! Let me forgive you!" Once I heard that testimony, any judgmental attitudes about divorce and remarriage left me, because I learned what God's attitude is toward those who, for whatever reason, are unable to keep to a certain standard.

A lack of repentance doesn't worry God, because He runs after people so He can forgive them. This shows the wonderful mercy, grace and love of God toward those who fall from grace. We tend to judge those who fall from grace and condemn them, God continues to love them and runs after them to bring His forgiveness to them. That's the difference between us religious folks and God. As we become more Christlike, we learn more about the extent of God's love toward us and those need His love more than we do.

Hi Oscarr, God is running after everyone. Even those who never accept His Son. That doesn't mean He is going to save everyone that doesn't repent. Repentance is the key, and why her vision or dream was for her only. He wanted her to REPENT so He could forgive her. Adultery is not the unpardonable sin, as long as your repent. But repentance can sometimes come with a cost. You can't keep the money you stole, even if you repent. As long as you keep the money you still have, you are perpetually a thief. Otherwise, repentance is of no significance. They just don't want to be punished for their crime.

What did Jesus say about the wives they were divorcing for any reason accept that she committed adultery? If she was innocent, then the husband committed adultery. If she was guilty, then anyone who married her would be guilty of adultery with her.

Repentance out of sorrow is wonderful if it brings you closer to God. But repentance out of fear of punishment is false. God can't be fooled.

 

[PollyJetix]

The key issue here is,
"Did Jesus come to do away with the Old Testament standard of morality by instituting a very different standard?"
I say no.
On the basis of what Jesus, Paul, and John said.
And also on the basis of how the first century Christians would have understood the letters written to them from the Apostles.

If we think the first century church would have understood the things the Apostles taught about divorce and remarriage very differently than we do, and would have arrived at opposite conclusions than we do... then there is more than a slim possibility that our understanding of the subject is wrong. Because Paul, especially, would have made it clear the old Mosaic standard of morality on this subject had changed. But he never did. Instead, he seems to have upheld the idea of the law as a perpetual moral standard.

 

[1stcenturylady]

The key issue here is,
"Did Jesus come to do away with the Old Testament standard of morality by instituting a very different standard?"
I say no.
On the basis of what Jesus, Paul, and John said.
And also on the basis of how the first century Christians would have understood the letters written to them from the Apostles.

If we think the first century church would have understood the things the Apostles taught about divorce and remarriage very differently than we do, and would have arrived at opposite conclusions than we do... then there is more than a slim possibility that our understanding of the subject is wrong. Because Paul, especially, would have made it clear the old Mosaic standard of morality on this subject had changed. But he never did. Instead, he seems to have upheld the idea of the law as a perpetual moral standard.

Yes, you were free, no matter how the Mennonites interpreted verses. BTW, did your ex ever remarry?

 

[PollyJetix]

Yes, you were free, no matter how the Mennonites interpreted verses. BTW, did your ex ever remarry?

He hasn't been able to land another wife. Not that he hasn't tried...
He made sure I knew he has had one girlfriend after another, though.

 

[1stcenturylady]

He hasn't been able to land another wife. Not that he hasn't tried...
He made sure I knew he has had one girlfriend after another, though.

Is he Mennonite?

 

[PollyJetix]

Is he Mennonite?

Was born into a Mennonite home, with Amish heritage.
Now completely non-Mennonite and not affiliated with any church.
I don't even know if he claims to be a Christian.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Was born into a Mennonite home, with Amish heritage.
Now completely non-Mennonite and not affiliated with any church.
I don't even know if he claims to be a Christian.

I don't know much about my ex's spiritual life either, just know they are still married according to pictures on facebook.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

The key issue here is,
"Did Jesus come to do away with the Old Testament standard of morality by instituting a very different standard?"
I say no.
On the basis of what Jesus, Paul, and John said.
And also on the basis of how the first century Christians would have understood the letters written to them from the Apostles.

If we think the first century church would have understood the things the Apostles taught about divorce and remarriage very differently than we do, and would have arrived at opposite conclusions than we do... then there is more than a slim possibility that our understanding of the subject is wrong. Because Paul, especially, would have made it clear the old Mosaic standard of morality on this subject had changed. But he never did. Instead, he seems to have upheld the idea of the law as a perpetual moral standard.

Jesus did not come to do away with the Law. Paul says that the Law is good and holy, but it was not effective enough to deal with sin on a permanent basis. The finished work of Christ, including His resurrection, fulfilled the Law in that a new Law was written on the hearts of those who were born again of the Spirit of God. The Mosaic Law tried to impose God's standards on the old man; but in Christ, believers are new creatures, with new hearts, with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Mosaic Law or any derivative of it, cannot be applied to New Creation folks. This includes using the Bible to beat people over the head if they don't come up to standards imposed by religious people. Because we are all priests, and are able to come boldly to the throne of grace on our own account and not have to go through anyone else except our great High Priest, we don't have to be subject to pastors and elders who try and beat us over the head with rules and Bible passages to get us under their control. Such people are in effect blaspheming the blood of Christ and denying the right of believers to access Christ, who is their defence Lawyer.

 

[PollyJetix]

Jesus did not come to do away with the Law. Paul says that the Law is good and holy, but it was not effective enough to deal with sin on a permanent basis. The finished work of Christ, including His resurrection, fulfilled the Law in that a new Law was written on the hearts of those who were born again of the Spirit of God. The Mosaic Law tried to impose God's standards on the old man; but in Christ, believers are new creatures, with new hearts, with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Mosaic Law or any derivative of it, cannot be applied to New Creation folks. This includes using the Bible to beat people over the head if they don't come up to standards imposed by religious people. Because we are all priests, and are able to come boldly to the throne of grace on our own account and not have to go through anyone else except our great High Priest, we don't have to be subject to pastors and elders who try and beat us over the head with rules and Bible passages to get us under their control. Such people are in effect blaspheming the blood of Christ and denying the right of believers to access Christ, who is their defence Lawyer.

Is there no morality standard that is allowed to be preached to the church?

 

[1stcenturylady]

Is there no morality standard that is allowed to be preached to the church?

Yes, Love

 

[PollyJetix]

Yes, Love

Paul took it further than "just love" in the epistles he wrote.
Look at the strong talk he had for those who lived immorally. For those who thought anything goes in the church.
And look at how he encouraged Timothy to take the helm of leadership in the church.
That was not "just love".

 

[1stcenturylady]

Paul took it further than "just love" in the epistles he wrote.
Look at the strong talk he had for those who lived immorally. For those who thought anything goes in the church.
And look at how he encouraged Timothy to take the helm of leadership in the church.
That was not "just love".

Yes, simple isn't it. Walk in the Spirit and you will NOT fulfill the lust of the flesh. If you walk in the flesh, then of course, you need to be told what not to do.