Divorce

[eldermike]

I tried to steer the discussion in that direction, and it was ignored. There are a lot of churches who treat divorce as an unpardonable sin, even though they don't say that it is. Divorcees are treated as second-or third-class Christians, and in essence made to do perpetual penance for something over which they may have had no control.

In my case, I had scriptural grounds, as my first wife did commit adultery against me while we were married. I pulled the plug on the marriage, and believe it was scriptural, and necessary. I tried to make it work, but ultimately saw that it was beyond hope, and ended it. I did not rush into another marriage, but waited 14 years, until I found a good woman, who I did marry, and we have been happily married now for 4 years.

There are some here who would think to judge me, and declare that I am an adulterer, and all I can say is, may such accusations perish with the accuser. My sins are forgiven, and what God has forgiven, let no man hold against me, as no man has the right or the authority to do so.

So true. Our sinful nature is an enemy of God, it battles for control, to make lists and feed the flesh with such as - "who is the greatest in the kingdom" - , while missing an important part of knowing Jesus as Lord. So many of God's children are out front of Jesus so far, it's sad. If the Son sets you free you are free indeed!

 

[mlqurgw]

hey...go one more verse 1 John 3:6-10...what's your take on that? Jesus teaches repentance in Luke 13-17 quite thoroughly. You may also reference Acts 2-5, and Rev. 2-5. I like the letters in Revelations, because even a church needs to be told to repent of their ways sometimes. How can you not know all your sins? Are you not aware of your own actions and thoughts?

1John 3:4-10 is all one thought concerning what and who we are in Christ. We walk in this body of death by faith in Him not by works of righteousness. John is here speaking of those who have been born of God. He is talking about the new creation that is all believers. Christ was manifested to take away our sins and in Him is no sin. Why? Because it has been taken away. Now John begins to explain how it is we live in this world as a people of 2 natures: that which is born of God and that which is flesh, the old man. John is not denying that all believers sin but recognizing that we who believe seek with all our new hearts to not sin. To continue to live as a profligate running to every sin that is in the natural heart is not faith in Christ. Now John is in no way telling us that our righteousness is of ourselves. If he is then we might as well throw out the rest of the Scriptures that teach that our righteousness is of God in Christ. In verse 9 he shows us what the new creation is that is in us. We have the seed of Christ in us that cannot sin. As Peter puts it we become partakers of the divine nature, 2Pet. 1:4. We have, as Paul puts it, Christ in us the hope of glory. We put on the new man which, after God is created in righteousness and true holiness, Eph. 4:24. We not only have a righteousness imputed to us in justification but a righteous nature implanted in us by Christ that does not and cannot sin. In this are we made manifest that we are the children of God. This is what sanctification actually is. It isn't a process by which we become more holy, there is no such thing as degrees of holiness, but we become holy and righteous in our new nature and are set apart as God's holy people, declared holy by God and made holy by God ( the three ways the word sanctify is used in Scripture) in the act of being born again by God. The old man of sin, while we are to reckon him as dead, still is alive in us though he no longer controls us. That is why we have the struggle Paul describes in Gal. 5. and Rom. 7. The old man can never be made better by works. He doesn't need to be taken to the hospital of works righteousness to be cured but to the cross to be crucified. As Paul I live, yet not I but Christ lives in me and the life that I now live I live by the faithfulness of the Son of God. Gal. 2:19-21

As far as not knowing all my sin I am aware of many things that plague me constantly as sin but I am also aware of the sin that is my nature that defiles all that I do. Sin is more than just transgression of the Law it is anything that is not of faith. Rom. 14:23. As Jeremiah describes my natural heart as deceitful above all things and desperately wicked so that I can't even know how bad it is I know that in many ways I sin against God that I don't even know of. Though I do recognize a degree of what I do as sin I much more recognize that I am by nature sin. My confession is not of sins but of being a sinner. My repentance is taking sides with God against my self and hating what I am by nature. Yes I do always seek to not sin but I sin taints everything I do. That is why I look to Christ alone and not anything in or about myself. True repentance isn't to quit doing certain things, that can be done by disciplining one's self, but turning from yourself and your works and resting in Christ as your only acceptance with God and all your righteousness.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

In Matt. 19:3-12, we find a group of Pharisees attempting to trap Jesus into taking sides in a theological debate and stir up strife by asking Jesus to take a side in the Hillel-Shammai dispute that was raging at the time. The very popular and theologically liberal Rabbi Hillel taught that it was lawful for a Jewish man to divorce his wife for any cause whatsoever; the far less popular and theologically conservative Rabbi Shammai taught that it was lawful for a Jewish man to divorce his wife only if she had committed adultery against him. The Pharisees knew that Jesus was very conservative in His theology and they knew that He would most likely take the side of Rabbi Shammai, and consequently become, along with Rabbi Shammai, far less popular.

If the exception clause in Matt. 19:9 is genuine scripture rather than a very early addition to the original text, we have Jesus falling right into the trap set for Him by the Pharisees and taking the side of Rabbi Shammai. In my opinion, Jesus was not so foolish as to fall into such a trap, and that He replied to them,

9. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery.”

That this was His actual reply is confirmed by the reaction of His disciples,

10. The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.”

This was not the reaction of the Jews to the teaching of Rabbi Shammai, so we can be quite certain that Jesus taught very differently, and did not include in His answer the exception for adultery that Rabbi Shammai included in his teaching. And, in His teaching elsewhere, Jesus is not quoted as including the exception for adultery having been committed.

Mark 10:11. And He *said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her;
12. and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.”

Luke 16:18. “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.”

Compare:

Matt. 19:3. Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?”
4. And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE,
5. and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’?
6. “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”


Paul, in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, expressed the same teaching in this manner:

1 Cor. 7:10. But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband
11. (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.

We also find Paul applying this Biblical truth in Romans 7:

1. Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives?
2. For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband.
3. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.
4. Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

(All quotations from the Scriptures are from the NASB, 1995)

 

[mlqurgw]

In Matt. 19:3-12, we find a group of Pharisees attempting to trap Jesus into taking sides in a theological debate and stir up strife by asking Jesus to take a side in the Hillel-Shammai dispute that was raging at the time. The very popular and theologically liberal Rabbi Hillel taught that it was lawful for a Jewish man to divorce his wife for any cause whatsoever; the far less popular and theologically conservative Rabbi Shammai taught that it was lawful for a Jewish man to divorce his wife only if she had committed adultery against him. The Pharisees knew that Jesus was very conservative in His theology and they knew that He would most likely take the side of Rabbi Shammai, and consequently become, along with Rabbi Shammai, far less popular.

If the exception clause in Matt. 19:9 is genuine scripture rather than a very early addition to the original text, we have Jesus falling right into the trap set for Him by the Pharisees and taking the side of Rabbi Shammai. In my opinion, Jesus was not so foolish as to fall into such a trap, and that He replied to them,

9. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery.”

That this was His actual reply is confirmed by the reaction of his disciples,

10. The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.”

This was not the reaction of the Jews to the teaching of Rabbi Shammai, so we can be quite certain that Jesus taught very differently, and did not include in His answer the exception for adultery that Rabbi Shammai included in his teaching. And, in His teaching elsewhere, Jesus is not quoted as including the exception for adultery having been committed.

Mark 10:11. And He *said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her;
12. and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.”

Luke 16:18. “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.”

Compare:

Matt. 19:3. Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?”
4. And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE,
5. and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’?
6. “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”


Paul, in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, expressed the same teaching in this manner:

1 Cor. 7:10. But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband
11. (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.

We also find Paul applying this Biblical truth in Romans 7:

1. Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives?
2. For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband.
3. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.
4. Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

(All quotations from the Scriptures are from the NASB, 1995)

Repeating a second or third time the same thing that was not necessarilly true the first time doesn't make any more true.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

So true. Our sinful nature is an enemy of God, it battles for control, to make lists and feed the flesh with such as - "who is the greatest in the kingdom" - , while missing an important part of knowing Jesus as Lord. So many of God's children are out front of Jesus so far, it's sad. If the Son sets you free you are free indeed!

John 8:31. So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine;
32. and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
33. They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, ‘You will become free’?”
34. Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.
35. “The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever.
36. “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.” (NASB, 1995)

1 Cor. 10:13. No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it. (NASB, 1995)

There is absolutely no excuse for any Christian committing adultery; and there is absolutely no excuse for any Christian continuing in an adulterous relationship with a second spouse.

 

[DeaconDean]

Repeating a second or third time the same thing that was not necessarilly true the first time doesn't make any more true.

Isn't that called "spamming"?

Spamming and Advertising
Do not repetitively post similar or identical posts or threads.

Of course, what do I know, according to most here, I'm an ignoramus.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Repeating a second or third time the same thing that was not necessarilly true the first time doesn't make any more true.

Did you entirely miss the central point that I was making in my post, a point that I had not yet posted anywhere on this message board? Perhaps I include so much supportive factual information in my posts that my points are sometimes lost to some readers.

 

[98cwitr]

1John 3:4-10 is all one thought concerning what and who we are in Christ. We walk in this body of death by faith in Him not by works of righteousness. John is here speaking of those who have been born of God. He is talking about the new creation that is all believers. Christ was manifested to take away our sins and in Him is no sin. Why? Because it has been taken away. Now John begins to explain how it is we live in this world as a people of 2 natures: that which is born of God and that which is flesh, the old man. John is not denying that all believers sin but recognizing that we who believe seek with all our new hearts to not sin. To continue to live as a profligate running to every sin that is in the natural heart is not faith in Christ. Now John is in no way telling us that our righteousness is of ourselves. If he is then we might as well throw out the rest of the Scriptures that teach that our righteousness is of God in Christ. In verse 9 he shows us what the new creation is that is in us. We have the seed of Christ in us that cannot sin. As Peter puts it we become partakers of the divine nature, 2Pet. 1:4. We have, as Paul puts it, Christ in us the hope of glory. We put on the new man which, after God is created in righteousness and true holiness, Eph. 4:24. We not only have a righteousness imputed to us in justification but a righteous nature implanted in us by Christ that does not and cannot sin. In this are we made manifest that we are the children of God. This is what sanctification actually is. It isn't a process by which we become more holy, there is no such thing as degrees of holiness, but we become holy and righteous in our new nature and are set apart as God's holy people, declared holy by God and made holy by God ( the three ways the word sanctify is used in Scripture) in the act of being born again by God. The old man of sin, while we are to reckon him as dead, still is alive in us though he no longer controls us. That is why we have the struggle Paul describes in Gal. 5. and Rom. 7. The old man can never be made better by works. He doesn't need to be taken to the hospital of works righteousness to be cured but to the cross to be crucified. As Paul I live, yet not I but Christ lives in me and the life that I now live I live by the faithfulness of the Son of God. Gal. 2:19-21

As far as not knowing all my sin I am aware of many things that plague me constantly as sin but I am also aware of the sin that is my nature that defiles all that I do. Sin is more than just transgression of the Law it is anything that is not of faith. Rom. 14:23. As Jeremiah describes my natural heart as deceitful above all things and desperately wicked so that I can't even know how bad it is I know that in many ways I sin against God that I don't even know of. Though I do recognize a degree of what I do as sin I much more recognize that I am by nature sin. My confession is not of sins but of being a sinner. My repentance is taking sides with God against my self and hating what I am by nature. Yes I do always seek to not sin but I sin taints everything I do. That is why I look to Christ alone and not anything in or about myself. True repentance isn't to quit doing certain things, that can be done by disciplining one's self, but turning from yourself and your works and resting in Christ as your only acceptance with God and all your righteousness.

good explanation...I like that and it makes sense. Thank you. We've really gotten off on a tangent though, haven't we? I think my point at this juncture in the conv. is to ask the question:

"Do you believe that it is a sin to divorce your spouse for something other than adultery; or even to divorce your spouse at all; or is divorce not a sin at all?"

 

[mlqurgw]

good explanation...I like that and it makes sense. Thank you. We've really gotten off on a tangent though, haven't we? I think my point at this juncture in the conv. is to ask the question:

"Do you believe that it is a sin to divorce your spouse for something other than adultery; or even to divorce your spouse at all; or is divorce not a sin at all?"

Which question I believe I answered in my first post. Post #3.

 

[nobdysfool]

John 8:31. So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine;
32. and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
33. They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, ‘You will become free’?”
34. Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.
35. “The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever.
36. “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.” (NASB, 1995)

1 Cor. 10:13. No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it. (NASB, 1995)

There is absolutely no excuse for any Christian committing adultery; and there is absolutely no excuse for any Christian continuing in an adulterous relationship with a second spouse.

Ergo, you have made many professing Christians out to be sinners, and unforgiven, therefore not saved. You have set aside the Blood of Christ, to hew to a Law which Israel could not keep. You have, in essence, rendered divorce and adultery to be nearly unforgivable sins, despite the clear fact that they are not blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, which is the ONLY unforgivable sin. The only way out of divorce and remarriage in your eyes is to tear asunder even more lives and insist on reconciliation, even if the other has remarried, and has a family.

Truly scripture rightly says "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life". All you have given is the letter of the Law. There is no Spirit there.

2 Cor. 5:17 Therefore, if anyone [is] in Christ, [he is] a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

 

[Hammster]

John 8:31. So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine;

32. and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”

33. They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, ‘You will become free’?”

34. Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.

35. “The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever.

36. “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.” (NASB, 1995)



1 Cor. 10:13. No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it. (NASB, 1995)



There is absolutely no excuse for any Christian committing adultery; and there is absolutely no excuse for any Christian continuing in an adulterous relationship with a second spouse.

You are right. There is no excuse. That is why we need a Savior.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Ergo, you have made many professing Christians out to be sinners, and unforgiven, therefore not saved. You have set aside the Blood of Christ, to hew to a Law which Israel could not keep. You have, in essence, rendered divorce and adultery to be nearly unforgivable sins, despite the clear fact that they are not blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, which is the ONLY unforgivable sin. The only way out of divorce and remarriage in your eyes is to tear asunder even more lives and insist on reconciliation, even if the other has remarried, and has a family.

Truly scripture rightly says "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life". All you have given is the letter of the Law. There is no Spirit there.

2 Cor. 5:17 Therefore, if anyone [is] in Christ, [he is] a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

I do not believe that it is appropriate to set aside the explicit teaching of Christ on the subject of divorce and remarriage claiming that it is legalism. Indeed, Christ set aside the permissiveness of the Law, and taught a new doctrine which was so strict that his disciples responded to His teaching by saying,

“If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” (Matt. 19:10)

No post-conversion sins are forgivable without repentance, and there is no repentance in the case of the ongoing sin of adultery in a second marriage. In order for forgiveness to be given, the sin must be fully repented of, both in the heart and in the activity. Stopping the sin, however, does not require, as is suggested in your post and as I have posted to the contrary, the breaking up of a second family or the reconciliation of the first marital relationship.

The teaching of Jesus on divorce and remarriage is as clear as Baccarat® crystal. The only problem with it is that some people do not like what He taught. Jesus taught what He taught for our own good; therefore, changing what He taught can only hurt us in the long run.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

You are right. There is no excuse. That is why we need a Savior.

Matt. 1:21. “She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”

Jesus came into the world to save us from our sins. He did not come into the world to hold our hand while we live in an adulterous second marriage.


Colossians 3:1. Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.
2. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth.
3. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
4. When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory.
5. Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry.
6. For it is because of these things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedience,
7. and in them you also once walked, when you were living in them. (NASB, 1995)

 

[Hammster]

Matt. 1:21. “She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”

Jesus came into the world to save us from our sins. He did not come into the world to hold our hand while we live in an adulterous second marriage.


Colossians 3:1. Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.
2. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth.
3. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
4. When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory.
5. Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry.
6. For it is because of these things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedience,
7. and in them you also once walked, when you were living in them. (NASB, 1995)

Why do you think Paul had to write that? (And don't forget the teachings of the Gospel in the first two chapters. A lot of legalists skip those and go right to chapter 3)

 

[mlqurgw]

I do not believe that it is appropriate to set aside the explicit teaching of Christ on the subject of divorce and remarriage claiming that it is legalism. Indeed, Christ set aside the permissiveness of the Law, and taught a new doctrine which was so strict that his disciples responded to His teaching by saying,

“If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” (Matt. 19:10)

No post-conversion sins are forgivable without repentance, and there is no repentance in the case of the ongoing sin of adultery in a second marriage. In order for forgiveness to be given, the sin must be fully repented of, both in the heart and in the activity. Stopping the sin, however, does not require, as is suggested in your post and as I have posted to the contrary, the breaking up of a second family or the reconciliation of the first marital relationship.

The teaching of Jesus on divorce and remarriage is as clear as Baccarat® crystal. The only problem with it is that some people do not like what He taught. Jesus taught what He taught for our own good; therefore, changing what He taught can only hurt us in the long run.

This is part of your slate wiped clean at faith and you having to keep it clean after correct?

 

[nobdysfool]

I do not believe that it is appropriate to set aside the explicit teaching of Christ on the subject of divorce and remarriage claiming that it is legalism. Indeed, Christ set aside the permissiveness of the Law, and taught a new doctrine which was so strict that his disciples responded to His teaching by saying,

“If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” (Matt. 19:10)

No post-conversion sins are forgivable without repentance, and there is no repentance in the case of the ongoing sin of adultery in a second marriage. In order for forgiveness to be given, the sin must be fully repented of, both in the heart and in the activity.

In other words, we must add to the work of Christ in order for the work of Christ to be effective for us. That's what it appears you are saying here.

Stopping the sin, however, does not require, as is suggested in your post and as I have posted to the contrary, the breaking up of a second family or the reconciliation of the first marital relationship.

Logically, that's where your take on it leads. "Stopping the sin" in your definition, would require divorcing a second spouse, thereby breaking up a family, even if one did not pursue reconciliation with a former spouse who has remarried, and according to you is now an habitual, lost sinner. Not to mention the children who will have suddenly become products of a broken home, and will suffer from the lack of parenting, since their mother or father can never remarry, but at best, could only be reconciled with their original spouse. Not to mention the children of second marriages, who your position makes bastards, and who I'm sure would be treated as such by those who believe as you do.

The teaching of Jesus on divorce and remarriage is as clear as Baccarat® crystal. The only problem with it is that some people do not like what He taught. Jesus taught what He taught for our own good; therefore, changing what He taught can only hurt us in the long run.

Over and over again, you have claimed that the exception that appears in one verse is spurious, added later, yet I don't recall you ever giving any proof of that contention. if you did, please point us to that proof. I don't believe you've made a solid case for it.

Without clear and solid proof, your position becomes nothing more than your personal opinion.

 

[desmalia]

I do not believe that it is appropriate to set aside the explicit teaching of Christ on the subject of divorce and remarriage claiming that it is legalism. Indeed, Christ set aside the permissiveness of the Law, and taught a new doctrine which was so strict that his disciples responded to His teaching by saying,

“If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” (Matt. 19:10)

I'm not sure it's really something to call a new doctrine. Too often the Pharisees had taken the law and twisted it for all sorts of reasons, totally ignoring the spirit of it. Christ points back to the spirit of it, which is the covenant, a divine relationship that mirrors His nature and brings Him glory. They had turned into little more than a breakable contract full of loopholes. That is never what He intended it to be.

No post-conversion sins are forgivable without repentance,

Honestly I think some of what you've said about the seriousness of divorce is quite valid. But if you really mean what you said there and believe that Christ did not die once for all of our sins (past, present and future), then I really encourage you to prayerfully question your own hermeneutic.

Let me humbly suggest to you that we do indeed stand wholly forgiven, but when we sin we fail to glorify God, which is a thing that will greatly grieve us and Him.

and there is no repentance in the case of the ongoing sin of adultery in a second marriage. In order for forgiveness to be given, the sin must be fully repented of, both in the heart and in the activity. Stopping the sin, however, does not require, as is suggested in your post and as I have posted to the contrary, the breaking up of a second family or the reconciliation of the first marital relationship.

I don't understand what you're saying here. How does one stop committing adultery as you put it without breaking up the family? Are you advocating celibacy within the marriage (Paul seems to speak directly against this)? Do you think it's possible to recognize a past mistake, genuinely cry out to God in repentance for it, and then continue in the current marriage as a faithful and devoted spouse?

The teaching of Jesus on divorce and remarriage is as clear as Baccarat® crystal. The only problem with it is that some people do not like what He taught. Jesus taught what He taught for our own good; therefore, changing what He taught can only hurt us in the long run.

I agree the Bible takes the hard line on divorce and a lot of people don't like it. But there is forgiveness when we mess up, and we've got to remember that when we talk about sin like this. There is forgiveness, and we've got to be willing to face our own guilt and shame to move forward so that we don't remain trapped in that state, and can know the freedom of His forgiveness. There already is forgiveness for His children, but we don't get to experience any of that freedom if we remain willful against repentance. And when our brothers and sisters do genuinely repent of such sins we've got to be ready to embrace them too.

 

[JustAsIam77]

Is it ever okay with God for two people to divorce? Please base all answers on The Bible. Thanks and God bless!

Yes. Without looking at scripture, I believe if a spouse commits adultery, divorce is acceptable in Gods eyes. I'm sure I'll hear refuting by some quarters, but I think scripture is clear on this..Apostle Paul perhaps?

I've not read thru the entire thread, if this has been adressed, my apologies.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

I'm not sure it's really something to call a new doctrine. Too often the Pharisees had taken the law and twisted it for all sorts of reasons, totally ignoring the spirit of it. Christ points back to the spirit of it, which is the covenant, a divine relationship that mirrors His nature and brings Him glory. They had turned into little more than a breakable contract full of loopholes. That is never what He intended it to be.


Honestly I think some of what you've said about the seriousness of divorce is quite valid. But if you really mean what you said there and believe that Christ did not die once for all of our sins (past, present and future), then I really encourage you to prayerfully question your own hermeneutic.

Let me humbly suggest to you that we do indeed stand wholly forgiven, but when we sin we fail to glorify God, which is a thing that will greatly grieve us and Him.


I don't understand what you're saying here. How does one stop committing adultery as you put it without breaking up the family? Are you advocating celibacy within the marriage (Paul seems to speak directly against this)? Do you think it's possible to recognize a past mistake, genuinely cry out to God in repentance for it, and then continue in the current marriage as a faithful and devoted spouse?


I agree the Bible takes the hard line on divorce and a lot of people don't like it. But there is forgiveness when we mess up, and we've got to remember that when we talk about sin like this. There is forgiveness, and we've got to be willing to face our own guilt and shame to move forward so that we don't remain trapped in that state, and can know the freedom of His forgiveness. There already is forgiveness for His children, but we don't get to experience any of that freedom if we remain willful against repentance. And when our brothers and sisters do genuinely repent of such sins we've got to be ready to embrace them too.

Christ died once for all of our sins (past, present and future), but the death of Christ for our sins does no one any good apart from true and genuine faith, and true and genuine faith does not include adulterous behavior—true and genuine faith results in a true and genuine relationship with Christ. Those who are not true to Christ are not His.

Slipping a wedding band onto the finger of a second spouse does not constitute adultery; the sin of adultery is the actual act of adultery, whether it be in the mind or in the bed. Continuing to be a good spouse and a good parent in a second marriage is not a sin; and being a good spouse and a good parent does not include adulterous behavior. Paul’s instructions to married couples were not addressed to couples in which one or both parties were in a second marriage. Slipping a wedding band onto the finger of a second spouse has been, for many, a past mistake, and if it is truly repented of, through faith in Christ, it is forgiven.

Faithfulness and devotion in marriage is first to Christ, secondly to each other; and faithfulness and devotion in marriage to Christ does not include adulterous behavior.

 

[nobdysfool]

You seem to be deliberately ambiguous about the nuts and bolts of a person who (for the sake of argument) divorced and remarried before they became a Christian. Spell it out, PG. What can the members of a "second marriage" do and not do?

I'm tired of the dancing around the subject that is going on. Spell it out.