Does Matt 5:32 Mean I Can't Marry A Divorcee?

[blackribbon]

A local pastor refused to marry a couple after having had a discussion with the 2 at which time they admitted they were not Christians. So he told them they were welcome to use the church building but that he would not marry them. One of the couple was the daughter of a very wealthy couple who had a prominent position in the church., enough so that a visit to the regeonal powers that be fired him
This man had 3 or 4 little kids and they threw him out of work because he stood for rightiousness.
I think it was shameful. The rich parents were used to getting their way and here comes a new pastor who would not bend and he is thrown out.

Which is why non-Christians have such a dim view on Christianity...this is the stuff they see and think we condone as a religion and this is what God is about.

 

[blackribbon]

This story opens with the scribes and Pharisees leveling a test at Jesus' feet. Jesus sat in the women's court of the temple, teaching the people.

Seeking to entrap Jesus, the scribes and Pharisees burst into the women's court and threw a married (or betrothed) woman before Him. They "caught" her in the act of adultery and seized her. Consider the specific test they were putting forth: "Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now the Law of Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?"

And now we press the question that is so rarely asked whenever this story is read.

Who is this woman?

The answer may surprise you.

She's you. And she's us.

We have all been "caught" in our sins. By the same token James said that if you break one commandment, you've broken them all (James 2:10). That places all of us, men and women alike, on the same moral level. We have all sinned. If every Christian would have eyes to see this truth, we would humbly eliminate all self-righteousness from our hearts.

In short, we are all made of clay; we all have the propensity to sin. With one devastating statement Jesus demonstrated that the Law wasn't wrong, but if everyone saw the Law for what it was, we would understand that we are all guilty. Including the self-anointed, puritanical, moral guardians known as the scribes and Pharisees ... and those who follow in their footsteps.

It's interesting that John 8 opens with a group of men wanting to stone a woman, and it ends with a group of men wanting to stone Jesus. When people's hypocrisy is exposed, the typical instinct is to kill the person who did the exposing. And that's exactly what Jesus did in this scene. Self-righteous men exposed an adulterous woman. A merciful prophet exposed the hypocrisy of religious leaders. It's hypocritical for sinners to want to harm other sinners because of sin. According to Jesus, only the guiltless could rightfully carry out such a righteous sentence of justice.

Unfortunately, this same judgmental attitude lives in the hearts of many self-righteous Christians today. These are those who clearly see the evil in others while being blind to the evil residing in their own hearts. In the mind of God, righteousness and justice are grounded in grace. Whenever grace is removed, we are left with the heartless hypocrisy of Pharisaism. In this story, Jesus Christ didn't overturn the Law. Instead, He re-established righteousness on the basis of grace.

He essentially said to the woman, "Don't sin like this again." Not because she might be stoned. But because grace had rescued her—and she now possessed a new identity as a beautifully loved child of God. Jesus is the Prophet who is greater than Moses. While the Law demanded execution, Jesus re-established righteousness on the basis of grace.

Don't misunderstand. Sin is heinous. Whether it takes the form of adultery, or slander, or abusive words in a fit of rage, or jealousy, or gossip, or lying (pick your sin), God doesn't ignore it because sin harms the people He created. Yet a person who brings correction to those who hurt others ought to do it with no hint of self-righteousness in their hearts, knowing full well that they are equally fallen and capable of much worse (Gal. 6:1-5).

If a person lovingly confronts another human being using a Christlike attitude, they will experience more hurt by bringing the correction than the person they correct. Why? Because they know how clay-footed they themselves are. And because they are humble, they realize just how precarious they themselves are in living a holy life.

Grace ushers in forgiveness, but it also empowers us to walk in a new way. Holiness, then, is built on the experience of grace, not on the fear of the Law. He's in the business of rescuing and releasing us, while at the same time calling our sin for what it is: self-centeredness.

As mere mortals, none of us has the capacity to correctly judge the human heart. If you have received Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, you are set blessedly free from condemnation. Not only can you not be condemned, you can't even be indicted. Why? Because you are in Christ, and He's unindictable.

Because God has placed you in Christ, making you holy and blameless in His sight, Jesus has called you to a brand-new life. A life no longer marred by sin, but baptized by grace—just like the woman caught in the act of adultery. Thus He says to you ... and to us ... Go and sin no more. I have written a new identity and a new future for you in the dust and dirt of this life.

Excerpted from The Day I Met Jesus: The Revealing Diaries of Five Women from the Gospels by Mary DeMuth and Frank Viola.

 

[Grafted In]

Which is why non-Christians have such a dim view on Christianity...this is the stuff they see and think we condone as a religion and this is what God is about.

So do you think the pastor made a bad decision?
In my opinion to do otherwise would amount to tickling the ears.

 

[blackribbon]

So do you think the pastor made a bad decision?
In my opinion to do otherwise would amount to tickling the ears.

No, I think the church that fired him for making the right decision even if it had financial repercussions did the wrong thing. I think the pastor was total justified in his decision...I'd even have said he was justified in not allowing the couple to use the church.

Either we recognize the sanctity of the marriage contract by taking it seriously (which means a Christian ceremony should only be for Christians along with pre-marital training to explore the suitability of the people entering into the contract) or we don't lay condemnation of a failed marriage on everyone's head.

 

[Grafted In]

No, I think the church that fired him for making the right decision even if it had financial repercussions did the wrong thing. I think the pastor was total justified in his decision...I'd even have said he was justified in not allowing the couple to use the church.

Either we recognize the sanctity of the marriage contract by taking it seriously (which means a Christian ceremony should only be for Christians along with pre-marital training to explore the suitability of the people entering into the contract) or we don't lay condemnation of a failed marriage on everyone's head.

By allowing them to use the church he is saying what I think the 2 of us agree on, that the building means nothing.

 

[blackribbon]

By allowing them to use the church he is saying what I think the 2 of us agree on, that the building means nothing.

I vacillate on that. It is God's home and the altar where they were getting married belongs to Him. Symbolically, it does matter. However, in the large scheme of things, it is just a building...I think it was his compromise that should have been good enough for the wealthy parents. The couple wanted the "pretty background" without recognizing the significance of the Christian wedding.

 

[Goodbook]

yea my friend who got married at the time was living with her bf and had a child by him, he was previously married, they decided to do the right thing and tie the knot, was counselled by a presybterian minister, to get right with God and she became a christian as did her husband after they got married. I think she made her vows to God the day she got married. Her husband then came round from being away from the Lord and they are both ministering and outreaching active in the church today.

I don't think the minister would have married them and not told them the gospel. Funnily enough they didn't join the presy church they went to the baptist.

I think that's because Baptists baptise new believers but presy tend to only baptise their own family members as babies.

 

[Goodbook]

and just another example, another one of my church bible study ladies, she married her childhood sweetheart, who wasn't a christian when she met him, but after they started going out and he wanted to marry her, she pretty much wouldn't marry him unless he heard the gospel and was open to God. He was slow to come round, but she'd had an athiest dad and a believing mother so I think it was hard for her. But now they are doing bible studies together.

 

[Goodbook]

My other bible study lady sister, her husband is still unsaved. So we are praying for him. She hasn't left him and they live at peace but its hard on her. They can't share in spiritual matters. But all their children are christians and baptised.

I don't think divorce is actually that common amongst christian couples..but you do find that one who you thought may be christian commits adultery and they actually hadn't truly believed in the first place they just went to church cos their family did or just out of obligation. Because no born again christian would sin against their Lord like that, deliberately. I mean, I don't know anyone who would do that, we know it's wrong.

 

[Grafted In]

I vacillate on that. It is God's home and the altar where they were getting married belongs to Him. Symbolically, it does matter.

Very telling. Catholic?

 

[Goodbook]

? who you referring to?
No, my bible study friends are all baptists.
We don't believe just because you go to church or signed up as a member that you are a christian.
catholics have a different view of marriage. They either forbid it or they get things annulled or they force the other unbelieving party to convert to the church teachings, but they can do that and still not actually believe in God.

 

[Goodbook]

I know a few divorced former catholics. They get ostracised from their church.

 

[Grafted In]

See post quoted. Mr.blackribbon .

I was responding to his (her?) statement that the God lives in the church buildings.
He must get very lonely when church lets out.
My belief is that He resides in born again Christians only.

 

[blackribbon]

Very telling. Catholic?

Not in the least though I have Catholic friends. I currently attend a non-denominational (this church doesn't have "members")...when I lived in the south, I was a Southern Baptist (very non-traditional version)...both very solid Bible based churches. As a Christian, I do believe that church is holy ground because the Bible says it is. And no, God doesn't "live" in the church but it is a place of worship and reverence. I personally believe that God exist everywhere...not even limited to the bodies of born again Christians.

Plus I am female...and have been my entire life.

 

[CCHIPSS]

I understand all about legalism. I was part of a highly conservative church. So I know it too well. But knowing God's law is different from understanding the point of God's law. God's law tells us what is ideal. But we are in a fallen world filled with non-ideal situations. Once again this does not give us a ticket to sin all we want. But we do the best we can.

I will give you an example. In Cambodia child prostitution is very common. And these children are nearly always controlled by local gangs. The police are all bribed and couldn't care less.

There is a church that was set up in one of such towns. The gang told the church very clearly that if the church ever try to interfere with the gang's prostitution business, the gang would burn down the church the next day. The gang will "permit" the church to exist if it do not interfere with their business, and only provide health care and basic education for the child prostitutes.

And that's how that church operated. It helped the children by medical and educational care. The church teaches them that Jesus loves them. But the church said nothing about the children prostitution going on. The same children would go to church in the morning and go back to being a prostitute at night.

The church has no worldly power in Cambodia. The gang and corrupted police forces ruled the day. The only thing the church could do was to try to bring salvation to these prostitutes.

One prostitute said: "Jesus has been merciful to me. He gave me comfort and forgiveness when I have to be a prostitute. And the next morning he welcomes me back!"

So is the church turning a blind eye to the sin of sex before marriage? No of course not! But in this terrible situation the church can only do what they can.

Once these prostitutes becomes adults, they finally are frees from the grasp of the gangs. The gang wants child prostitutes, not adult ones (yes this is sick). And the church help them get married and give them consoling for their past.

Many of these ex-prostitutes has serious problems. And divorce and abuse is very common. But the church keep helping them and some of them remarried. If the church is going to "forgive" their prostitution past, the church will also forgive the fact that they are now a divorcee.

So tell me, is the church wrong?

 

[CCHIPSS]

Ok, so then the 2 sit and wait for confirmation that her ex has had sex with another. Wishing he would, praying he would, hoping he does.
And just how will they ever know for certain unless they actually witness the sex act itself?
Even if they could aquire proof, does not God's word still reveal a strong desire to restore the first marriage?

Go ahead and encourage them to marry. I suspect a day will come when you wish you had given sound Biblical advice.

If you want to go legalistic, there is no end.

My stance is actually lighter than that. My stance is divorcees can remarry at any situation. Why? Because while it is adultery to remarry, it is also adultery to look at any woman/man lustfully. Read my point #33 for my reasoning. That said, in certain situation, I would admit that this stance would be too light. A marriage between two "true" Christians should not be broken unless under the most extreme circumstances, such as an abusive spouse.

For those that is slightly legalistic, I say that if an ex-spouse go and have sex with another person, then the other partner is now free to remarry.

Now let's get into more legalistic. It was written that God will curse a non-believer for the next 4 generations. (Numbers 14:18, Exodus 20:5) So if you want to have your ideal marriage, you cannot just check your partner. You must also check your partner's past 4 generation, to make sure all 4 generations were faithful followers of Jesus. Else your marriage to this person, even if a faithful Christian, will be cursed due to the sins of the past 4 generations.

Now what about verses like Deuteronomy 24:16 and Ezekiel 18:20? Nope let's ignore that! Because the whole point of legalism is to focus on a few verses that support our point of view and we ignore all the other verses and contexts. Most importantly to be legalistic we must ignore the love of Jesus.

Can we be more legalistic? Surprisingly yes! In Deuteronomy 21:18-21 we see that the father should stone their stubborn son (and daughter) to death. So let's say your father wants you to clean the garage. You refuse. Well guess what you are stubborn! So your father, under the Jewish law, has the right to stone you to death.

Now I believe the whole bible is God inspired. However not every single verse in the bible is equally applicable. Now certain things are certain. For example sex before marriage is certainly wrong. But let's say a Christian couple already had sex before marriage, should the church now go and break this couple apart? Should the church say that the lady or the man lacks character and so is unfit to marry? In fact should the church kick this couple out of the church and we never want to see them again? Nope of course not!

If we are going to make an error, either on the law or on love, let us error on the side of love. So we will be merciful, graceful and understanding of our brothers and sisters, just as Christ loved us.

 

[CCHIPSS]

But who among us is qualified to decide whether or not a marriage is salvageable? You mentioned Paul. I checked your home page...you're not catholic, so I'm guessing you don't see that office being handed down like the pope. How can anyone double guess God on any issue. He is God and if we let Him He can fix anything.
The position you hold on this issue is becoming more and more the norm and as a result we are seeing divorce rates among Christians not that far behind the rates among the unsaved. I refuse to contribute to that tendency and always urge those considering divorce or remarraige to think long and hard before they act.

Dude you are opening a very dangerous can of worm by mentioning "Salvageable". If we have to worry about this, then Christians must only marry virgins. Because when anyone have sex together, they become one fresh forever.

So let's say you find a lovely Christian lady who is not a virgin. You married her. Everything is going great. Then one day her ex-lover (not even husband) comes and wants her back. Now the ex-lover claims that he has became a Christians.

So what are you going to do? What if it is God's will that the relationship between your wife and her ex-lover be "salvaged"? God did made them into one single fresh.

As I told you before once we go away from love and into the legalistic path, there is no end to it.

 

[Rajni]

I think the hand wringing is not so much that the other party is a divorcee is that the OP doesnt want to be an adulterer.

Oh I agree, and I think the two go hand in hand.

My point is that those who wax legalistic over the
divorce-remarriage issue need to remember that
Scripture indicates that God Himself has done
both – gotten divorced and gotten remarried.
So He has set a precedent, and, given He is sinless,
I would think that this precedent therefore isn’t a
sin, at least not in the areas of abuse and
adultery.

And, if marrying a divorced individual is absolutely
wrong, should those who are set to become the
Bride of Christ turn Him down as Bridegroom so as to
avoid committing adultery?


-

 

[Grafted In]

I can sum up my position with few words.
If a divorced person remarries before their ex dies they lose God's very best for them.

 

[blackribbon]

I can sum up my position with few words.
If a divorced person remarries before their ex dies they lose God's very best for them.

Don't you think we lose God's best every time we sin...regardless of what the sin is? If they got to the point that they divorced, they already were a long way from "God's best"... Heck, life on this planet is far from God's best ... that was forfeited when we were banished from the Garden.