Is there such a thing as "Christian divorce?"

[HuntingMan]

I never said she wasn't.

your sematics game implies it.

That's what I said, except you want to use the English word "married" to describe a situation where the woman is betrothed but not yet laqach.

ie MARRIED but not yet 'taken' (hometaking)....the betrothed woman WAS lawfully and religiously married to her husband...fully binding on both of them.

The English term assumes that both are simultaneous which makes it confusing to discuss in Old Covenant terms. That's why I keep telling you it's a matter of terminology and not substance. We agree but are using the English term "married" differently because it doesn't adequately explain the two part Old Covenant marriages in which the parts are not simultaneous.

This is all a very nice attempt to try to make your argument sound as tho Im missing some point, David but sorry, its not working.

Its not a matter of terminology on my part, its a matter of a semantics game on your part.
The data shows that they WERE very clearly in a BINDING covenant of marriage that only DIVORCE could end from the day of their betrothal.
It was no less and no more binding after having sex or hometaking ...which is something you have PLAINLY tried to present here and elsewhere(that it is somehow MORE binding AFTER consummation) to make your error SEEM to work when it doesnt.

 

[HuntingMan]

Matthew 5; proof that the exceptions are for today....
WmTipton

Assertions/Conclusions of this Article
To show conclusively that Jesus' exceptions DO apply to THIS covenant.

Supporting Evidence
In each of the following comments from Matthew 5 Jesus shows what WAS said and how things WERE and then states how HE says they are to be.

Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."
Mat 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be liable to the judgment. And whoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be liable to the sanhedrin; but whoever shall say, Fool! shall be liable to be thrown into the fire of hell.
Mat 5:23 Therefore if you offer your gift on the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you,
Mat 5:24 leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
Mat 5:25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are in the way with him; that the opponent not deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Mat 5:26 Truly I say to you, You shall by no means come out from there until you have paid the last kodrantes.

Mat 5:27 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not commit adultery."
Mat 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Mat 5:29 And if your right eye offends you, pluck it out and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.
Mat 5:30 And if your right hand offends you, cut it off and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.


Mat 5:31 It was also said, Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.
Mat 5:32 But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery.


Mat 5:33 Again, you have heard that it has been said to the ancients, "You shall not swear falsely, but you shall perform your oaths to the Lord."
Mat 5:34 But I say to you, Do not swear at all! Not by Heaven, because it is God's throne;
Mat 5:35 not by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; not by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King;
Mat 5:36 nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.
Mat 5:37 But let your word be, Yes, yes; No, no. For whatever is more than these comes from evil.

Mat 5:38 You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth."
Mat 5:39 But I say to you, Do not resist evil. But whoever shall strike you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Mat 5:40 And to him desiring to sue you, and to take away your tunic, let him have your coat also.
Mat 5:41 And whoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him two.
Mat 5:42 Give to him who asks of you, and you shall not turn away from him who would borrow from you.

Mat 5:43 You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy."
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you,
Mat 5:45 so that you may become sons of your Father in Heaven. For He makes His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

If even one of these responses Jesus makes doesnt apply to this New Covenant, then NONE of them can be said as applying either.
If verses 5:31-32 do not mean that Jesus is saying "heres how things WERE but *I* am telling you that this is how they ARE" then we cannot apply any of the other passages, such as 5:43-44, to today either.
*IF* Jesus' response in Matthew 5:32...."But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication..." does not apply to the new covenant church, then neither does "But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you..." and it is entirely inconsistent and illogical to say otherwise.

 

[SealedEternal]

You're failing to understand my point that marriage in English implies both a covenant and a joining together, while in Old Covenant marriages they were separate events. Thus the term "marriage" causes confusion in discussing Old Covenant marriages in English.

My position is that in Old Covenant relationships, the betrothal covenant lawfully bound the two as husband and wife, and at the end of the betrothal period the man would take possession of her and they would then join as one physically.

You can ascribe whatever English terms you want to these two steps, but that's what I believe scripture teaches, and the best I can explain it.

SealedEternal

 

[HuntingMan]

You're failing to understand my point that marriage in English implies both a covenant and a joining together, while in Old Covenant marriages they were separate events.

Oh brother....whenever anyone disagrees with you it always seems to come down to an excuse of their not understanding you.

I have spent COUNTLESS hours dissecting your nonsense, David..I know EXACTLY what you claim to believe and I have witnessed the huge change in minor points over the last 2 years in your views. Im fairly observant, kwim ?

The COVENANT/CONTRACT of marriage was set into place AT THE BETROTHAL...that is FACT. They were COVENANTED IN MARRIAGE on THAT DAY.
Is this unclear for you in any way ?

Sex or NO sex they WERE UNITED in MARRIAGE AT betrothal thus why she could lose her life for adultery and why a writ of DIVORCE was required to end that MARRIAGE.

There is NO misunderstanding on my part...there is ONLY a semantics game on YOUR part.

Thus the term "marriage" causes confusion in discussing Old Covenant marriages in English.

False.
"marriage' meant they were husband and wife lawfully and religiously.
The betrothal CUSTOM did not change, alter or nullify the COVENANT/CONTRACT of marriage they were under, NOR was that COVENANT/CONTRACT ANY less viable or binding either BEFORE or AFTER hometaking.

The betrothal CUSTOM simply allowed this MARRIED virgin a year before being TAKEN by her husband into his home and his bed.

My position is that in Old Covenant relationships, the betrothal covenant lawfully bound the two as husband and wife, and at the end of the betrothal period the man would take possession of her and they would then join as one physically.

They consummate their marriage, thus it is 'completed' at hometaking
That doesnt nullify that the marriage covenant was ENTIRELY BINDING AS a marriage covenant...before God and man....it was simply a CUSTOM for the Jews.

You can ascribe whatever English terms you want to these two steps, but that's what I believe scripture teaches, and the best I can explain it.

SealedEternal

It isnt 'two steps' as you are playing off here.
They were under the covenant/contract of MARRIAGE from the day of betrothal.
The CUSTOM simply allowed for this MARRIED virgin to have a year (less for a widow) at home before the man she was joined in MARRIAGE (ie her HUSBAND) would 'TAKE' her to his home and consummate their union.

Again, it was NO more and NO less binding AFTER than it was before as proven by the fact that she would be put to death for adultery both BEFORE and AFTERWARD.

Another round, david ? Im up for the evening

 

[MyKidsDaddy]

Ok....I'm a fast reader, but I don't know if I can read all of this much more.

I have a simple question, at least I hope its simple.

My wife has an affair that may not be physical sex, then later she has an affair including physical sex. (inappropriate contenteia????) I guess thats makes it into the Matt 5 'reasons for divorce'

HuntingMan,
Background, both me and wife are believers when we got married. She commits adultery. Am I free to remarry after our divorce? Does it matter 'who' files for divorce? Will she be free to remarry after the divorce? She shows no 'signs' of believing anymore. By signs...lack of church going, going to bars/clubs, acting as though she is not married while in public around other men.

With all seriousness, what does it take for her to be saved once we're divorced? It seems to me that if someone becomes "unhappy" with their marriage and then goes and commits adultery....divorce happens and the adulterous one is nolonger bound by marriage but is just as free to remarry as the faithful spouse.

MKD

 

[HuntingMan]

Ok....I'm a fast reader, but I don't know if I can read all of this much more.

I have a simple question, at least I hope its simple.

My wife has an affair that may not be physical sex, then later she has an affair including physical sex. (inappropriate contenteia????) I guess thats makes it into the Matt 5 'reasons for divorce'

The sin would be covered under 'inappropriate contenteia', yes.

HuntingMan,
Background, both me and wife are believers when we got married.

If you are both believers the rules are different for your marriage from the start. God does expect that as believers you will BOTH do what is necessary to make the marriage work.
Of course, some say they are believers who arent..and some fall away who were...so your individual situation may be different than others.

She commits adultery. Am I free to remarry after our divorce?

You are 'free' yes (tho I expect someone here to bash you about the head and neck with an NASB bible here soon, if they havent by the time I post this)
The question here is 'ARE you both TRUE Christians'
If so, can you find a way to make your marriage work ?
My exs WERENT true believers and they committed adultery many times, my second wife even had a lesbian affair....and I never even thought about divorcing them until they made it clear they had no intentions of stopping the adultery.
*IF* your wife isnt like that you really need to firstly try to save your marriage...kwim ?

Does it matter 'who' files for divorce? Will she be free to remarry after the divorce?

The divorce ENDS the marriage covenant (tho some legalist will surely disagree). Whether sin is committed by one or both parties is really the question here.

She shows no 'signs' of believing anymore.
By signs...lack of church going, going to bars/clubs, acting as though she is not married while in public around other men.

Ah, I see. This can always be a problem in a marriage. As Jesus shows in the parable of the sower..they believe for a while then fall away. It happens and it stinks to be married when it does.

With all seriousness, what does it take for her to be saved once we're divorced?

I am more inclined to believe that no real change deep in the spirit occurred (ie conversion) than I am to believe that you wife is apostate. Apostasy does happen, of course, but its usually far more obvious than someone who says they believe but really dont...kwim ?
Jesus said that many will come to Him in that day and He will tell them that He NEVER knew them. They SEEM to think they are saved and they go thru the motions, but they really arent His to begin with.
This may or may not be the case with your wife (ex?)

It seems to me that if someone becomes "unhappy" with their marriage and then goes and commits adultery....divorce happens and the adulterous one is nolonger bound by marriage but is just as free to remarry as the faithful spouse.

MKD

When the marriage is ended thru divorce, neither party is more 'free' than the other. One party may be in more sin than the other tho...most likely the guilty who caused the divorce in comparison to the innocent who remained faithful . The marriage, however, is ended at divorce...precisely why God doesnt like it to happen.
IF divorce did nothing as some here will try to claim, then Christs speaking against putting away makes no sense whatsoever.
God hates the ENDING/BREAKING of the marriage covenant because it DOES break/end it. Tho He does see that sometimes there is little choice.

youre in a tough position...Ive been there myself twice with women who claimed to be christians yet after a time presented no fruits of actually being one.

I would tread very carefully over the next while if this is all very recent and stay in prayer to God continually to find out what His plan is for your life. Dont make any hasty moves for sure...so you dont regret anything later.

 

[SealedEternal]

The COVENANT/CONTRACT of marriage was set into place AT THE BETROTHAL...that is FACT. They were COVENANTED IN MARRIAGE on THAT DAY.
Is this unclear for you in any way ?

No.

Sex or NO sex they WERE UNITED in MARRIAGE AT betrothal thus why she could lose her life for adultery and why a writ of DIVORCE was required to end that MARRIAGE.

There's the problem. You're using an English term "marriage" which implies both a covenant and a joining together, but are trying to use it to Old Covenant marriages in which a covenant is made, so there is a lawful "marriage", but the two are not living together yet so there is not a physical "marriage". That's what I meant about the terminology problem.

There is NO misunderstanding on my part...there is ONLY a semantics game on YOUR part.

It's not a game, but a problem of terminology between languages and marriage customs. You're using a term that implies something in English that isn't true in the culture we are referring. You're trying to blurr the two together while I'm trying to explain the distinction.

False.
"marriage' meant they were husband and wife lawfully and religiously.

Your statement is false, because marriage is an English term that implies that they are husband and wife lawfully as well as physically, but you are using the term to refer to women who are still living under the authority of their parents, and not physically married to her husband, so the term is misleading.

The betrothal CUSTOM did not change, alter or nullify the COVENANT/CONTRACT of marriage they were under, NOR was that COVENANT/CONTRACT ANY less viable or binding either BEFORE or AFTER hometaking.

I didn't say it was, but there was a clear distinction. They were not permitted to dwell together or have sexual contact during the betrothal period, so there was a clear distinction from what we consider "marriage." Yes the betrothal was far more binding than what we call engagement so that term is misleading as well, but it was not quite what we call marriage either since they were forbidden from having any physical contact.

The betrothal CUSTOM simply allowed this MARRIED virgin a year before being TAKEN by her husband into his home and his bed.

They consummate their marriage, thus it is 'completed' at hometaking
That doesnt nullify that the marriage covenant was ENTIRELY BINDING AS a marriage covenant...before God and man....it was simply a CUSTOM for the Jews.
It isnt 'two steps' as you are playing off here.

You just described two steps.

They were under the covenant/contract of MARRIAGE from the day of betrothal.
The CUSTOM simply allowed for this MARRIED virgin to have a year (less for a widow) at home before the man she was joined in MARRIAGE (ie her HUSBAND) would 'TAKE' her to his home and consummate their union.

Correct.

Again, it was NO more and NO less binding AFTER than it was before as proven by the fact that she would be put to death for adultery both BEFORE and AFTERWARD.

Agreed.

 

[SealedEternal]

I have a simple question, at least I hope its simple.

My wife has an affair that may not be physical sex, then later she has an affair including physical sex. (inappropriate contenteia????)

No, inappropriate contenteia is "fornication" while moichaō is adultery. inappropriate contenteia (fornication) was the only lawful cause for divorce in the Old Covenant, while moichaō (adultery) is the sin one commits by divorcing and remarrying:

Mark 10: 6-12 "But from the beginning of creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. "FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." In the house the disciples began questioning Him about this again. And He *said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; 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.

I guess thats makes it into the Matt 5 'reasons for divorce'

No, not unless you're under the Old Covenant Law. Are you stoning and divorcing those who wrong you, or turning the other cheek and praying for them. Your answer will determine which covenant you are under.

Background, both me and wife are believers when we got married. She commits adultery. Am I free to remarry after our divorce?

No, but you will be committing it if you do.

Does it matter 'who' files for divorce?

No, adultery by definition means you are both bound to each other. One can't be bound while the other is single.

Will she be free to remarry after the divorce?

Jesus covered both parties saying they will be in adultery to remarry.

She shows no 'signs' of believing anymore. By signs...lack of church going, going to bars/clubs, acting as though she is not married while in public around other men.

What difference does that make in regard to you keeping your covenant to her until death do you part?

Matthew 19:4 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."


Romans 7:2-3 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. 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.

1 Corinthians 7:39 A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

With all seriousness, what does it take for her to be saved once we're divorced? It seems to me that if someone becomes "unhappy" with their marriage and then goes and commits adultery....divorce happens and the adulterous one is nolonger bound by marriage but is just as free to remarry as the faithful spouse.

You have it backwards since Jesus said that neither is "free" but both are committing adultery if they attempt to marry someone else.

SealedEternal

 

[HuntingMan]

There's the problem. You're using an English term "marriage" which implies both a covenant and a joining together, but are trying to use it to Old Covenant marriages in which a covenant is made, so there is a lawful "marriage", but the two are not living together yet so there is not a physical "marriage". That's what I meant about the terminology problem.

Semantics.
*I* believe in SCRIPTURAL marriage WITH or WITHOUT the CUSTOM of betrothal.
Scriptural marriage BEGINS at the VOW to BE husband and wife...period.

I am confusing NOTHING David as I dont even RESPECT or HONOR anyones laws or rules for marriage other than GODS !

You can keep this nonsense up that Im not understanding and its easy to see that its your way of deflecting/distracting from the issue.

Your statement is false, because marriage is an English term that implies that they are husband and wife lawfully as well as physically, but you are using the term to refer to women who are still living under the authority of their parents, and not physically married to her husband, so the term is misleadin

no, my statement is quite accurate because I couldnt care less what the english term means. I also do not recognize the usurped authority of godless governments who have taken over Gods marriage covenant by force.

*I* define marriage by scripture alone.
The term ISNT misleading at all...you simply need it to be so your error will work.
They are BOUND in a SCRIPTURAL covenant of MARRIAGE (as Adam and Eve were) from the day the covenant OF marriage is agreed upon.
The marriage is the COVENANT, not sex which is quite secondary...otherwise those without sexual organs could never marry at all. Pathetic that it comes down to SEX for some...

They were not permitted to dwell together or have sexual contact during the betrothal period, so there was a clear distinction from what we consider "marriage."

I demand proof from Gods word of this assertion.
Ill expect it in your next post ...tho I doubt you will have ACTUAL proof to support the statement.

Betrothal was CUSTOM...it was not law.
The widow would only have a month instead of a year....so this claim of their being allowed is somewhat fallacious. It was customary to give her a year...Ive seen nothing that shows me that conditions couldnt be different.
Again, Ill expect proof from Gods word in your next post to support the statement above.

Yes the betrothal was far more binding than what we call engagement so that term is misleading as well, but it was not quite what we call marriage either since they were forbidden from having any physical contact.

Oh brother...who exactly are you feeding this nonsense to david because frankly you know better than to try to push it on me.
Betrothal WAS BINDING AS a marriage...she WAS a WIFE to her HUSBAND.....the only person who is confused here is you.

Again, I want to see PROOF of the highlighted statement from SCRIPTURE...sorry, its just how I am..

You just described two steps.

No I just described ONE step that bound them in an absolute fashion in marriage and a SECOND step that was nothing but CUSTOM that didnt alter or nullify the covenant they were under.
Sad that you have to twist the facts to get your error to work here

 

[HuntingMan]

No, not unless you're under the Old Covenant Law. Are you stoning and divorcing those who wrong you, or turning the other cheek and praying for them. Your answer will determine which covenant you are under.

Same pathetic red herring nonsense as usual.
The exceptions are for THIS covenant, Im afraid.

Matthew 5; proof that the exceptions are for today....
WmTipton

Assertions/Conclusions of this Article
To show conclusively that Jesus' exceptions DO apply to THIS covenant.

Supporting Evidence
In each of the following comments from Matthew 5 Jesus shows what WAS said and how things WERE and then states how HE says they are to be.

Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."
Mat 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be liable to the judgment. And whoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be liable to the sanhedrin; but whoever shall say, Fool! shall be liable to be thrown into the fire of hell.
Mat 5:23 Therefore if you offer your gift on the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you,
Mat 5:24 leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
Mat 5:25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are in the way with him; that the opponent not deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Mat 5:26 Truly I say to you, You shall by no means come out from there until you have paid the last kodrantes.

Mat 5:27 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not commit adultery."
Mat 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Mat 5:29 And if your right eye offends you, pluck it out and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.
Mat 5:30 And if your right hand offends you, cut it off and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.


Mat 5:31 It was also said, Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.
Mat 5:32 But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery.


Mat 5:33 Again, you have heard that it has been said to the ancients, "You shall not swear falsely, but you shall perform your oaths to the Lord."
Mat 5:34 But I say to you, Do not swear at all! Not by Heaven, because it is God's throne;
Mat 5:35 not by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; not by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King;
Mat 5:36 nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.
Mat 5:37 But let your word be, Yes, yes; No, no. For whatever is more than these comes from evil.

Mat 5:38 You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth."
Mat 5:39 But I say to you, Do not resist evil. But whoever shall strike you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Mat 5:40 And to him desiring to sue you, and to take away your tunic, let him have your coat also.
Mat 5:41 And whoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him two.
Mat 5:42 Give to him who asks of you, and you shall not turn away from him who would borrow from you.

Mat 5:43 You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy."
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you,
Mat 5:45 so that you may become sons of your Father in Heaven. For He makes His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

If even one of these responses Jesus makes doesnt apply to this New Covenant, then NONE of them can be said as applying either.
If verses 5:31-32 do not mean that Jesus is saying "heres how things WERE but *I* am telling you that this is how they ARE" then we cannot apply any of the other passages, such as 5:43-44, to today either.
*IF* Jesus' response in Matthew 5:32...."But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication..." does not apply to the new covenant church, then neither does "But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you..." and it is entirely inconsistent and illogical to say otherwise.

 

[HuntingMan]

Same old Hypercalvinsitic argument presenting PART of the relevant data

What difference does that make in regard to you keeping your covenant to her until death do you part?

Matthew 19:4 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."

READERS SEE->Click->>> What is ''one flesh'' and what is it that God joins together
READERS SEE->Click->>> "Let not man Put Asunder" vs "let the unbeliever depart"

Romans 7:2-3 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. 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.

1 Corinthians 7:39 A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

READERS SEE->Click->>> "Bound by Law" (Romans 7, 1 Cor 7:39)

You have it backwards since Jesus said that neither is "free" but both are committing adultery if they attempt to marry someone else.

False....

Mat 5:31 It was also said, Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.
Mat 5:32 But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery.

 

[MyKidsDaddy]

If you are both believers the rules are different for your marriage from the start. God does expect that as believers you will BOTH do what is necessary to make the marriage work.

She claims she is 'tired and drained' of trying to make it work.....(I think she means she is stressed with me asking why she is out with other men)

The question here is 'ARE you both TRUE Christians'

I almost hate to ask for a definition of "TRUE Christian"

If so, can you find a way to make your marriage work ?

I want to, but she is not sure she wants to.

Ah, I see. This can always be a problem in a marriage. As Jesus shows in the parable of the sower..they believe for a while then fall away. It happens and it stinks to be married when it does.

I am more inclined to believe that no real change deep in the spirit occurred (ie conversion) than I am to believe that you wife is apostate. Apostasy does happen, of course, but its usually far more obvious than someone who says they believe but really dont...kwim ?
Jesus said that many will come to Him in that day and He will tell them that He NEVER knew them. They SEEM to think they are saved and they go thru the motions, but they really arent His to begin with.
This may or may not be the case with your wife (ex?)

She seemed to go through the motions at first and it looked authentic. However, it looks like she is quite hollow at the spiritual core now.

I would tread very carefully over the next while if this is all very recent and stay in prayer to God continually to find out what His plan is for your life. Dont make any hasty moves for sure...so you dont regret anything later.

Not very recent. Started ~5 years ago. Then again at 3 yrs ago. Most recently 8 months ago.
Tomorrow is anniversary #22. It doesn't look promising that we'll make it to 23. (Irony...I commented on our 19th that "I hope we make it to #20) I believe that comment sealed my fate, unfortunately.

 

[HuntingMan]

She claims she is 'tired and drained' of trying to make it work.....(I think she means she is stressed with me asking why she is out with other men)

whew....Ive heard that one before. There isnt much you can do, brother, when your wife has literally given up.
You could play the 'stander' game and wait it out, I suppose, but that is between you and God.

btw, you may have to just ignore any legalist posts you see. Im not saying you should but you can expect them to bombard you will their one sided viewpoint, for sure, and it can be nauseating at best...

I almost hate to ask for a definition of "TRUE Christian"

True Christian : someone who loves, follows and obeys they Lord Jesus to the best of their ability who exhibits fruits of being such.

I want to, but she is not sure she wants to.

Well, while there is a ray of hope, and since you already want to, I wouldnt think that giving it the old college try would be too much.
You obviously cant change her....and dont let anyone dupe you into believing that God will force her or make her be good, He wont...that simply isnt His game.
He can try to reason with her, as He did Cain, but we all know Cains ends, so God reasoning with someone doesnt always end how we'd like it.

She seemed to go through the motions at first and it looked authentic. However, it looks like she is quite hollow at the spiritual core now.

Been there, done that.
My first wife laid off the cheating for a few weeks early on and played the christian game with me....then she ended up trying to pick up guys at the church we went to a few times.
"Hollow" is a good choice.

Not very recent. Started ~5 years ago. Then again at 3 yrs ago. Most recently 8 months ago.
Tomorrow is anniversary #22. It doesn't look promising that we'll make it to 23. (Irony...I commented on our 19th that "I hope we make it to #20) I believe that comment sealed my fate, unfortunately.

Hindsight has always staggered my mind. Those little things we are oblivious to that in the aftermath start to add up.
I remember finding a cigar butt in my ashtray one time. I dont smoke and neither did my first wife...but for some reason it wasnt until after the divorce that I figured out whose it was and what had happened when adding that to other details.

I really cant give you much direction, brother.
Regardless of the waste paper SE has provided for the bottom of our cage here divorce does end the marriage covenant which is why God is so agaisnt it (even if He understands it has to happen at times), so your being 'free' isnt the issue at all.

I guess the main thing is that YOU do ALL you reasonably CAN do to save the marriage if that is what you decide to do. YOu have grounds for divorce thru her adulteries, but thhat doesnt mean you HAVE to divorce...only that you can do so without sinning yourself in the matter.


Again, you may have to ignore certain legalist types here whos views do not take ALL of the relevant data into account.

 

[HuntingMan]

And now...if you would, sealedeternal...

Tell us, David....WILL YOU OBEY 'unequivocal' commandment of Jesus Christ here that no exception is given for ?
If I ask you for $750...do you OBEY the Lord or do you find some loophole to get out of it ?
You demand adherence to Jesus supposed instruction by everyone else, are you exempt from doing so yourself ?

I know you like the 'every/everyone' argument, so this should be simple enough

Give to EVERY man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
(Luk 6:30 KJV)

Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
(Mat 5:42 KJV)

Do you TRUST and OBEY the Lord you claim to love or do you ignore any CLEAR commandment when it inconveniences you ?
READERS...WILL SE OBEY the clear commandment or will he excuse himself from doing so

 

[SealedEternal]

Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him.

SealedEternal

 

[HuntingMan]

Proverbs 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him.

SealedEternal

we already knew you would ignore the 'unequivocal' commandment of our Lord that you GIVE to EVERY person that asks of you.
Thus we will be ignoring future demands by you that WE obey any commandments YOU might present
Cant very well take your demands seriously that WE obey when YOU will not.....

 

[SealedEternal]

What if I do send you the money? Is your conscience so seared that you have no problem taking advantage of peoples faith in Christ as Lord to extort money from them? This does illustrate how you miss the entire point of the Bible, and use His word for your own selfish gains rather than as it is intended which is to teach you how to forsake your own selfishness and learn to put God's will above your own, and the love of your fellow man above yourself. Rather than asking yourself how you may better serve others, you look to use His Word to put others under bondage to you.

Jeremiah 22:15-17 Did not your father eat and drink And do justice and righteousness? Then it was well with him. "He pled the cause of the afflicted and needy; Then it was well. Is not that what it means to know Me?" Declares the LORD."But your eyes and your heart Are intent only upon your own dishonest gain, And on shedding innocent blood And on practicing oppression and extortion."

1 Timothy 6:3-5 If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain.

Just as with divorce and remarriage, you read God's Word looking for how it can serve your ends and justify your lifestyle, rather than as you should, which is to look for what God demands of you.


SealedEternal

 

[HuntingMan]

What if I do send you the money? Is your conscience so seared that you have no problem taking advantage of peoples faith in Christ as Lord to extort money from them?

And is YOUR conscience so seared that you have nothing to do but spew forth your unbiblical hate rhetoric against those who were forced into divorce and later remarry ?

This does illustrate how you miss the entire point of the Bible, and use His word for your own selfish gains rather than as it is intended which is to teach you how to forsake your own selfishness and learn to put God's will above your own, and the love of your fellow man above yourself. Rather than asking yourself how you may better serve others, you look to use His Word to put others under bondage to you.

Wheres my violin ?

Just as with divorce and remarriage, you read God's Word looking for how it can serve your ends and justify your lifestyle, rather than as you should, which is to look for what God demands of you.


SealedEternal

i read Gods word to understand and obey the INTENT
YOU use Gods word, at least the parts you can mangle and distort, to play judge against those who have committed NO sin and those who have been FORGIVEN of the sins they committed in the PAST.

You push commandments YOU claim are there on US, yet YOU REFUSE to obey the CLEAR command where NO exception exists...
Now....are you going to OBEY the UNEXCEPTED commandment of the Lord as you DEMAND WE obey...or are you going to continue to play this distraction game ?

Give to EVERY man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
(Luk 6:30 KJV)

Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
(Mat 5:42 KJV)

I repeat..

Thus we will be ignoring future demands by you that WE obey any commandments YOU might present
Cant very well take your demands seriously that WE obey when YOU will not.....

I do find it amusing how you chastise many folks for using the OT to support their views....but then you run right to it yourself

 

[catlover]

You have scriptural support for your thought here, Myways. Jesus taught
that subsequent marriage of the divorced is adultery, and Paul taught
only death could separate the bond of marriage. IF divorce, according to
Paul, happened, only reconciliation was allowed (the other alternative
being to remain unmarried until one of them dies).

So all those who have remarried after divorce,should divorce again, and then become single and celibate?

 

[pgp_protector]

So all those who have remarried after divorce,should divorce again, and then become single and celibate?

If that's the choice I've got.
I guess I'd rather burn then put my little one through a divorce and broken family.