Forgiveness following divorce and remarriage

[PeterDona]

I don't know about all that. But I do know the scriptures and your, "no" and "neither" , is example that you do not.

You make a bold claim that I do not, not sure exactly what it is that I do not.
However, the scriptures that you are most likely referring to, is Matthew 5:32, and 1 Cor 7:15. Both scriptures were taken by Erasmus in the 16th century, and misused to open a door for divorce and remarriage. This seemingly also opened for the split of the England Church from the Catholic Church.
However, going deeper into the meaning of those 2 scriptures will reveal that they do not intend to say what so many people want them to say. Actually Matthew 5:32 is a correcting comment on the widespread practise of divorce among the jewish people, based on a misreading of the law. And, 1 Cor 7:15 does not grant freedom to remarry, but only freedom to live alone if there is strife in the home.

Why not rather take a very clear Bible verse like, 1 Cor 7:39: The 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.
No unclarity here, and the Bible does not contradict itself.

 

[now faith]

Moses took another wife,after he parted from the first one.
God was angered by Aaron's wife's criticism of Moses and cursed her with leprosy.
God did not wink at sin as some people make excuses in the Old Testament by saying so.
Moses did not sin in God's will by marrying the Ethiopian Woman,and God's action toward the critics of the marriage, shows us God had ordained the marriage of Moses.
We live in the Church Age until the Lord returns.

Now we reason this :
John: 5. 26. For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27. And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 28. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29. And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. 30. I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. 31. If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.

God does not change:

Malachi: 3. 6. For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Same God old and New Testament, if remarriage was a sin of Adultery Moses would not have been in favor of God.

The main question is did God join together a couple,or was the marriage of the lust of the flesh?
If a man in the Flesh marry a Harlot....
1 Corinthians: 6. 15. Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. 16. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. -
So what God has joined together let no man put asunder, but God did not join you with harlot.

The only way I can see clearly in this topic ,what you have done in choosing a spouse God has no part in it.
But God will join people together for his will be done,and that is a truth

 

[Meowzltov]

There is an exemption from Title IX for religious institutions.

It looks like the worst California bill, the one that was going to stop scholarship funding, got stalled. However, another one passed:

Senate Bill 1146, by Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, would shrink the number of religious colleges that qualify for religious exemptions. Also under SB 1146, colleges that receive federal religious exemptions would be required to publicize that fact to prospective students. Another bill, Assembly Bill 1888, by Assemblyman Evan Low, D-Campbell, failed to move out of committee. That bill proposed that the state withhold Cal Grant funding eligibility for colleges that violate state nondiscrimination laws. https://edsource.org/2016/californi...-that-seek-to-bar-transgender-students/564869

 

[Meowzltov]

Unless a Church runs a public service for marriages (which could be covered under public accommodations laws), there's no ground for interference. This is paranoia. Churches commonly limit marriages to members, and often accept only people who have passed counseling with the pastor. There's no sign of an issue. Churches can marry only whites today if they want.

You'll see.

 

[Meowzltov]

Every single Catholic married couple who would be able to get an annulment if they tried all avenues, is living in fornication. Yet, presumably, only a small portion of those who could qualify actually remedy this by applying for an annulment. That's a serious problem.

A couple cannot know for sure whether their marriage was valid or not until the completion of the annulment process. Therefore FULL KNOWLEDGE, and thus the mortal sin of fornication, is impossible until the completion of the annulment process.

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

You make a bold claim that I do not, not sure exactly what it is that I do not.
However, the scriptures that you are most likely referring to, is Matthew 5:32, and 1 Cor 7:15. Both scriptures were taken by Erasmus in the 16th century, and misused to open a door for divorce and remarriage. This seemingly also opened for the split of the England Church from the Catholic Church.
However, going deeper into the meaning of those 2 scriptures will reveal that they do not intend to say what so many people want them to say. Actually Matthew 5:32 is a correcting comment on the widespread practise of divorce among the jewish people, based on a misreading of the law. And, 1 Cor 7:15 does not grant freedom to remarry, but only freedom to live alone if there is strife in the home.

Why not rather take a very clear Bible verse like, 1 Cor 7:39: The 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.
No unclarity here, and the Bible does not contradict itself.

I do make a bold claim. And I pity anyone who thinks they have to live in an unbearable marriage till the day they die because they imagine an omniscient Father wants it that way.

The ten commands of God that Jesus reiterated in his ministry still apply. Show me in one of them where God says, thou shalt not divorce.

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

Question: "What are biblical grounds for divorce?"

 

[hedrick]

Question: "What are biblical grounds for divorce?"

Like many other things, there are varying opinions.

A literal view would seem to say adultery, and also Paul’s exception for converts whose partner’s can’t accept it.

Others will tell you never.

A third view is that Jesus’ reference to “uncleanness” would have been understood in the 1st Cent as referring to the narrower of the two current Jewish views. The wider one was anything, even if the wife burned dinner. (This is worse than today's no-fault divorce, because the husband could do it unilaterally.) The narrower view looked at violations of the marriage vows, which ended up being understood much like today’s concept of a failed marriage.

Since the third view isn’t commonly presented, let me give the Biblical basis. The narrower Jewish view was that marriage was based on vows, and violations of the vows repeatedly and unrepentantly constituted grounds for divorce. There were understood to be 4 vows:

* not committing sexual indecency, from Deut 24:1. (Indecency is wider than just adultery, but narrower than burning dinner.)
* food, clothing, and marital rights, from Ex 21:10, typically understood as including emotional support, not just sex

[this per David Intone-Brewer, “Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible”]

 

[Hallstone]

Is ongoing adultery possible of forgiveness since there is no real repentance

I would say "no repentance no forgiveness" just as Jesus taught, this is a instance where the person would be required to "cut off their hand" in order to make it into heaven. We must not forget the importance of humbling oneself and changing ones life (often times drastically) in order to be forgiven. Like He said "the one that keeps His word is the one that loves Him".

 

[PeterDona]

The ten commands of God that Jesus reiterated in his ministry still apply. Show me in one of them where God says, thou shalt not divorce.

Divorce, or a separation, can be necessary. Example for me is, if there is violence. Then I might recommend a separation for some time. But this is debatable whether it is biblical.
Remarriage while a spouse is alive is a violation of the 7th commandment, thou shalt not commit adultery. Therefore the 2 are united until one of them die.
Take note, that the adultery happens at the event of the remarriage, not at the event of a divorce (separation). However, divorce is discouraged also.

 

[PeterDona]

[this per David Intone-Brewer, “Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible”]

I must say, I have come to think that he is too wide in his interpretations. A verse like Luke 16:18 dismisses adultery as a ground for freedom.

I still wonder about his thoughts on marital violence, based on Exodus 21:7-11, where he considers violence to be an extreme form of abandonment. I have not yet found verses to support such a position other than the one mentioned.

But then, Instone-Brewer is not really "scripture only", but rather "scripture seen in the historical context".

 

[Hallstone]

If someone divorced their spouse in a sinful way, and then remarried, ive heard it said that God would forgive their sin, and they move on with the next marriage.

Firstly, is the second marriage recognised by God, and if not, doesnt this make the second marriage, an ongoing sinful adulterous relationship that shouldnt continue?
So forgiveness in that context couldnt validate more of the same?

We just had a sermon on divorce, so its a question that was raised.

This sin is one of the reasons why all of the religious organizations have been abased, and they do not have power.
Psa 50:16 But to the wicked God says,
"What right have you to tell of My statutes
And to take My covenant in your mouth?
Psa 50:17 "For you hate discipline,
And you cast My words behind you.
Psa 50:18 "When you see a thief, you are pleased with him,
And you associate with adulterers.
This word "associate" or Cheleq means "to share inheritance with", in other words "sharing the rewards of repentance with those that aren't repentant". Essentially they are saying that those who are practicing adultery are "OK" too, which according to God, the ones that do this are considered by Him to be "wicked" and do not deserve to be included unless they repent, we can see a example of this too in the letters to the churches in Revelation, and all throughout the NT. Also if we examine what happened in Ezra's time, we see that keeping the Lord's commandments is way more important than keeping an unholy marriage together. Because what is unholy must be undone and what is holy cannot be erased.

 

[ManyWeaknesses]

I just wanted to say that I've noticed that, at the core of this discussion, it has really come down to authority.

Why should protestants, who have 40,000+ denominations in their religion that can't agree with one another with one mind and one judgement on how they interpret sacred scripture, have the authority to interpet sacred scripture when it comes to Divorce And Remarriage. By what authority do they interpret sacred scripture when it comes to Divorce And Remarriage?

Seriously. By the way, GotQuestions is a protestant-biased website as well. It's not the end-all as an authority on interpretting sacred scripture.

 

[Hallstone]

The startling truth of this subject is why the disciples demonstrated such shock when Jesus explained the truth to them and they exclaimed that if the truth is like that then it is better not to do it, this is the main reason why it took me almost 30 years to find a woman that had never been married before and had the Spirit of Jesus in her heart, we have been happy for fourteen years now and I am so glad I waited, and I would strongly encourage all young people to wait and search for the person who has the Spirit of God in their heart, and one of the ways that you can tell if they have Him is if they will remain pure during your courtship and if they believe the truth of this subject, meaning that they believe divine order and that marriage is permanent like Jesus said so that if a man marries a divorced woman he is practicing adultery, if they can accept this and understand it then they will have passed this portion of the testing, don't be fooled by people who just say they are Christians and have said "the words", but don't do the word.

 

[PeterDona]

Moses took another wife,after he parted from the first one.

It is a remote and disputed interpretation, that Moses had more than 1 wife: http://www.gotquestions.org/Moses-wife.html
And so it becomes hard to build any major understanding on something that is so vague. I would counsel that you build your Bible understanding on something more clear, when it comes to something that has so much importance for the salvation.

 

[Meowzltov]

I pity anyone who thinks they have to live in an unbearable marriage till the day they die

There is nothing to stop people from separating.

But seriously, most of the problems I see today in marriages stem from the fact that they were never valid in the first place. Protestants seriously need to understand the concept of PORNEIOS and what Jesus meant, and develop some way of determing which failing marriages were illicit, since Christ said that remarriage for them was not adultery.

 

[mercyfollowsme]

There is nothing to stop people from separating.

But seriously, most of the problems I see today in marriages stem from the fact that they were never valid in the first place. Protestants seriously need to understand the concept of PORNEIOS and what Jesus meant, and develop some way of determing which failing marriages were illicit, since Christ said that remarriage for them was not adultery.

i dont care what they watch, it doesnt make their marriage "illicit". Is there a checklist in the Bible somewhere?

 

[Vicomte13]

Given the sexual mess of the modern world, the answer is that everybody is probably damned for sexual immorality.

Fortunately, everybody is forgiven their sins to the extent they forgive the sins and debts of others. So, given our general immorality and sin, we had best remember that the only way left to save ourselves is by being very, very merciful and kind. Jesus promised that we would be forgiven to the extent that we forgive, so forgive everything and avoid damnation for sure.

Don't hold grudges. Be kind. Be merciful. Let people off the hook. Forgive struggling people the monetary debts they owe you. Let it go. Let it pass. Write it off. Do that, and Jesus promised God promised that he will write off your sins also.

It's the only way out of the boiling pot for the bulk of humanity. Divorced and remarried? You're an adulterer, and you'll stay one. Doomed? If you're an unforgiving, unmerciful, debt-counting prat, yep. If you forgive everybody their sins and debts against you, God will forgive you.

THAT is really the only way out of these bash traps - to remember that God forgives those who forgive. How many times? Seven times? No, seventy-times-seven.

So, if you're holding onto a grudge against another for his sin against you because he did not repent and reform, you're digging your own grave. Stop and let it go. You let it go for others, God will let it go. The merciful get mercy. The merciless are judged without mercy.

That's the way it is, that's the only way it is, and arguing AGAINST that revealed truth about God is essentially arguing for your own damnation as a merciless prat. So don't. Just accept it as it was revealed and run with it. Because it's really good news.

 

[Meowzltov]

i dont care what they watch, it doesnt make their marriage "illicit". Is there a checklist in the Bible somewhere?

Not everything is in the Bible--there were things left for Moses and the 70 judges to decide (see Deut 17:8-13). The Bible says that one should be just in business, meaning contracts, but doesn't list specifics. Marriage is a kind of contract (a covenant). Therefore it must be licit. I suggest it cannot be for example, fraudulant, or forced; it cannot be incestuous; it must be between a man or a woman. Would you agree to all those things? Or do you think, for example, that gay marriages are valid?

 

[Meowzltov]

Given the sexual mess of the modern world, the answer is that everybody is probably damned for sexual immorality.

Fortunately, everybody is forgiven their sins to the extent they forgive the sins and debts of others.

You are correct.

It needs to be stated, though, in order to be forgiven, we must repent. That means we must stop doing the sin. If remarrying after divorce is adultery, then we must move out, or live as brother and sister if there are kids involved.

However, as I've stated many times, most marriages that end in divorce do so because they were never licit in the first place -- they were Porneia, and so it is not adultery to remarry.