JCISGD

I will say this on the issue of divorce that I know that God's chosen disagree on this issue, so that is why even in all my study and prayer on it, that I take it to the Father and leave it with Him. The reason I do this is because he gave me a prophesy years ago regarding a man that would come into my future that I would have a ministry with. He told me quite a bit about it, but I won't go into that. I am divorced, so when a "God friend" chastised me regarding it because he doesn't believe that I can remarry, I told him, "I know what God told me, so I won't believe a man over God on this issue. Three godly men in my life all have different opinion on divorce and the Scripture, so two of you, and possibly all three are wrong. If you are right, perhaps I only assumed I'd marry this man. Maybe I won't be allowed to marry and this will be a ministry between us without marriage relations. That doesn't matter to me, either way." I won't babble on about that, but what I tell people is to LISTEN to God, not to man. If he wishes you to remarry, He'll tell you. I don't go off looking for this man, I don't try to make that prophesy come true in my own time, but I do know what God told me and I wait for Him to manifest it in my life. That said, I've waited 15 years for this to happen! And up to last week, I didn't have a clue as to who it was, but God revealed it to me last week after years of wondering. It is so marvelous how He keeps our ears dull regarding something and then in an instant, opens our ears to hear Him! So, this man is from my past and I hide under the cloak of my maiden name, and under the cloak of my roomie's name in my telephone number. It will be fun to see how God reveals me to this man, and fun as to how God leads him to find me! Im not judging you but i have some questions. God does not violate His word in the bible. Many ive seen who go on impressions/untested prophesies, fall headlong into error and much folly. If the bible forbids it then the Holy Spirit does not ok it. You speak of godly men with different opinions, they may all be wrong but if the fruits are good, then tree is good. Are they winning souls and is God present in power? How did God reveal this man to you? and does wisdom put unmarried men and women together in ministry? Who has God placed in your life to watch over you in your opinion? If they do not have good fruit then why call them godly, but if they do why then do you reject what they teach?

Before Christ ascended to His Father, there was no Holy Spirit for the church to guide us in our every day life. Man was basically alone trying to live according to the law. Now that we have His Spirit in us, we have no excuse not to live according to His will, if we are in deed willing to be led by His Spirit. Being willing to live for Him according to scripture and His leading of His Spirit, we would have what it takes to live through any situation scripture tells us to live through. Not only are we allowed to divorce due to unfaithfulness, but when an unbeliever wants a divorce due to our faith in Christ. That is what im leaning towards these days, but how come Jesus says "whoever marries a divorced women commits adultery" is it only men who are allowed to divorce? In my understanding Paul (quoting the Lord) says that two christian spouses must not divorce 1 Cor 7:10+11 and seems only to give concession for unbelievers to depart. But perhaps thats only to curb those who think their freedom gives licence for trading in their spouse ? Yes the Holy Spirit is available to all but that doesnt stop us from getting scripture wrong, and the understandings of scripture are many and varied, esp about MDR. Does anyone know a website with historical protestant teaching on MDR ? Thats the other thing that concerns me, it appears that divorce being acceptable in the church is only in the last 50-100 yrs and now it is rampant. I have not looked into any sites that show MDR results through out history. I do remember growing up when divorce was a bad word, so to speak. People worked things out instead of throwing people out. This society is a throw away society ... if you are done with it, throw it away and get a newer one. Being taught by the Holy Spirit is no guarantee that you are learning. The simplest example I can think of is school. Our kids go to school every day, but only a few actually learn what they are taught. Some pay attention and learn, most only half listen and some don't care, but they are all being taught the same thing. The same is whit the teaching of the Holy Spirit. Some pay attention and learn while the rest either half listen or reject the lesson all together. It all depends on the person. When Jesus taught His disciples the lesson on divorce, He was talking to men and it is reasonable for Him to use a divorced woman as an example. Divorce goes both ways. A woman who marries a divorced male is committing adultery, just as much as the one who divorces their spouse causes them to commit adultery. If you are really having a hard time with this subject, may I suggest that you lay aside any preconceived idea or knowledge you have about divorce and start on a clean slate. Forget about what Moses allowed, for we are in the new covenant. Moses, and the people of his time, did not have the Holy Spirit to guide them as we do for the past 2000 years or so. OL, Moses spoke directly to God when he needed to, and was with God for 40 days uninterrupted being sustained only by God. So was Moses hit and miss about the laws/allowances God gave through him. Why therefore do we even read the OT or why does God include Moses in Holy writ, not just for history surely? Please correct me but you seem to have contradicted yourself. I agree the man who divorces is also in adultery according to Jesus, so are you now agreeing with all remarriage is adultery? and if not who then can remarry in the light of both the man and women divorcing being called in adultery?

Before Christ ascended to His Father, there was no Holy Spirit for the church to guide us in our every day life. Man was basically alone trying to live according to the law. Now that we have His Spirit in us, we have no excuse not to live according to His will, if we are in deed willing to be led by His Spirit. Being willing to live for Him according to scripture and His leading of His Spirit, we would have what it takes to live through any situation scripture tells us to live through. Not only are we allowed to divorce due to unfaithfulness, but when an unbeliever wants a divorce due to our faith in Christ. That is what im leaning towards these days, but how come Jesus says "whoever marries a divorced women commits adultery" is it only men who are allowed to divorce? In my understanding Paul (quoting the Lord) says that two christian spouses must not divorce 1 Cor 7:10+11 and seems only to give concession for unbelievers to depart. But perhaps thats only to curb those who think their freedom gives licence for trading in their spouse ? Yes the Holy Spirit is available to all but that doesnt stop us from getting scripture wrong, and the understandings of scripture are many and varied, esp about MDR. Does anyone know a website with historical protestant teaching on MDR ? Thats the other thing that concerns me, it appears that divorce being acceptable in the church is only in the last 50-100 yrs and now it is rampant.

That is not what I'm saying at all. I am talking about this scripture verse only. I am saying that in this scripture, the Holy Spirit is teaching us "that you should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead"; i.e. Christ. Not that we are free to divorce and remarry. This verse was being misused in this subject. Ok sorryi think i got you mixed up with Openly Curious ?, its all lost on me, as im still stuck on my OP and wanting know how God/Jesus can allow divorce through Moses, and then appear to denounce all divorce as adultery unless one spouse has already been sexually unfaithful in Mat 5:32 ? "whoever marries a divorced women commits adultery" ? I guess i need to pray and seek God about it, there are so many variations of opinion out there.

Is that a true story? There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, but my heart sank when i heard you had driven off and broken your word that you gave as Christs representative. It was as if Jesus himself were speaking through Balams donkey, and as He said "whoever gives me drink of water will recieve a prophets reward. Its amazing but it seems as Christ himself asks us all to help others even risk our very lives but i too have "driven off" and left Him thirsty. This story has really shaken me up so to speak, how many others am i missing each day ? I really dont judge you and neither does Jesus, but He may have been asking you out onto the water? remember even Peter faultered and sank. I remember a lady on tv who was held captive by a desperate man and yet through Jesus won him over.

Hi hs, i started this topic as i came accross fairly strong proof that i have been wrong about divorce and now i am unsure and asking others for help re the assertions of Ted Weiland. Have your done a web search of him, he has some strong pro divorce evidences. I am a divorced person through infedelity on both sides, but i became a Christian and did not want to divorce, believing for God to bring healing and make us a family again, but she did not have the same faith. Its been 20 yrs now and i have sought to remarry but it has always been disasterous. Then i came accross strong evidence that remarriage was adultery, now i am unsure again and i just want to know the truth. What has what i think or want got to do with what God commands, we must be willing to live Gods way or forfeit salvation. If you involve your understanding based on how you are affected, are you not in danger of making your own god?

That's free to be married to Christ, not another person. hi Parker, IMO you are taking that verse out of context. Jesus says that apart from porenia anyone who remarries commits adultery Mat 19:9, so it is clear that atleast not all are free to remarry. What we are left with IMO is what is porenia and who then can remarry. Ok, let's put it in context. Romans 7:4 "Wherefore my brethren, you also are become dead to the Law..." (the Law is not dead, but we are dead to the Law because we are dead to its effects; this means that we are not to try to live for God by means of "Law," whether the Law of Moses, or Laws made up by other men or of ourselves; we are to be dead to all Law) "....by the body of Christ..." (this refers to the crucification of Christ, which satisfied the demands of the broken Law we could not satisfy; but Christ did it for us; having fulfilled the Law in every respect, the Christian is not obligated to Law in any fashion, only to Christ and what he did at the Cross); "....that you should be married to another..." (speaking of Christ) "...even to Him who is raised from the dead..." (we are raised with Him in newness of life, and we should ever understand that Christ has met, does meet, and shall meet our every need; we look to Him exclusively, referring to what He did for us at the Cross), "....that we should bring forth fruit unto God. (proper fruit can only be brought forth by the believer constantly looking to the Cross; in fact, Christ must never be separated from the work of the Cross; to do so is to produce "another Jesus" as referred to in II Cor. 11:4.) Im not sure that im getting your point there Parker, correct me if im wrong but you seem to be saying that all Christians being now dead to the law, are free to remarry? But Jesus himself has said that the only reason divorce does not constitute adultery is if Porneia has been committed, and paul reiterates this when he says the Lords command is that no Christian can divorce, but an unbeliever may depart. What we now have to be sure of is what is Porneia and does letting the unbeliever depart condone divorce as it not expressly written, and can only be assumed. Let me state that i have changed my original view, and now admit there may be allowance to divorce other than illegal marriage. I am not pushing for either side and only want to arrive at truth. The OP was asking for others to disprove or support the assertions of Ted Weiland, as to me much of what he states does seem to have merit.

Hi ASC, Jesus allowed people to worship Him when they fell at his feet,and when He entered Jerusalem. Also the very reason the religious leaders wanted Him crucified was because His words were direct claims to be God. The phrases "Son of God" with a capital "S", "before Abraham I AM" and "seated at the right hand of God" are/were understood by the Jews to mean exactly that, and they said "if you take that back we will let you go", but Jesus said to effect,"if i do that i will be lying". We non Jews often do not understand the correct meaning of phrases and language of those times, and need to "study to show ourselves approved. But the only dumb (mute) question is the one never asked.

Please provide the Scriptural verses which prove your point. I have given you ample verses that demonstrate Jesus is still in the flesh, and one verse which says he sits forever at the right hand of God as a man. Hi Leoxiii, John 20:26 "Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst of them". Ever seen flesh walk through doors ? When Mary? wanted to touch Jesus at the tomb, He said not to as He had not yet ascended to the Father and got his new body, but later he allows Thomas to touch His wounds. It does make we wonder then if Jesus will eternally bear His wounds from the cross? This new body might properly be called flesh but its not like the flesh we now live in.

Hmmm its just healthy debate i think. I grew up in a large family where robust challenges were common place. I only ask that people avoid getting personal. I dont think its following Jesus to use untempered speech when dealing with unbelievers whom we are wanting to win for Christ unless of course we are a prophet sent to denounce a city or the religious leaders if blocking the way to salvation. As Bean points out above we are not Jesus and dont have final knowledge or able to see hearts to know motive. Its true Ellen herself is not being witnessed to here, but unbelievers or those with a weak faith may be reading our words. This is why i have admitted error in some of my choice of wording. "Be cunning as serpents, but gentle as doves"

JCISGD, since this thread has gone off into left field a bit, I went back to the OP to see what you had to say. I agree with you that when it gets to the place where ministers have to fear prosecution for simply preaching the Bible, we are in a sad state of affairs. I also agree that the Lord's return cannot be far off. In America, we have a Constitutional right to free speech which should trump all hate crime laws. I personally oppose all hate crime legislation as we also are supposed to have a right to equal justice under the law. I think they should be challenged in court. hi Butero, yep not long now. Although a little shocked when i heard the anger in Ellens voice, I did think it was cause to rejoice that Christ was soon coming back rather than dismay at the state of things. We have read the end of the book so to speak and apart from a restless night, we get to wake up to breakfast in bed.

Not sure what you mean by this i.e Psalms are not for theology. I would imagine they are full of statements with literal meaning and explain God very well, NO? Greg. Hi Greg, you missed an important word, "literally". What i was saying is that to use poetic language literally where it is not intended that way, will cause a wrong theology. We can use the poetic? books, Job, Pslams, Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiates for theology, but not if we dont take into account the type of language we are reading. The Jews often used hyperbole to stress a point, but it would be error to think they were being literal. One of the Pslams speaks of "babies born speaking lies", but babies cant even talk so it is impossible that this was meant literally, and is hyperbole.

That's free to be married to Christ, not another person. hi Parker, IMO you are taking that verse out of context. Jesus says that apart from porenia anyone who remarries commits adultery Mat 19:9, so it is clear that atleast not all are free to remarry. What we are left with IMO is what is porenia and who then can remarry.

I tend to agree with the wisdom shown by those tempering their speech and refraining from name calling, and would never judge someone as reprobate as that belongs to God IMO. Straight after i started this topic, i did feel conviction for not bothering to google Ellen to get her correct name, and in hindsight my tittle could be seen to encourage a wrong attitude. Thank you to those who have made this plain to me by their seasoning of grace. It was error on my part and if a bad attitude continues i will call for it to be closed. Please remember the OP was trying to point out that IMO martyrdom was not far away for some, and that we can rejoice in the evidence that our Lords return is closer than ever.

Madmen are often perfectly happy despite all that goes on around them, and Ecclesiasties says "surely madness is in their hearts as they live", but Christians now feel deeply for a hurting world and against the evils that are committed daily. However the "Joy of the Lord " can equal and easily superceed all worldly pleasures.

Yes it does appear he has some wacky ideas, but the truth is the truth and i need to know if there is any merit in his teaching on Moses allowance for divorce being from God/Jesus, and therefore not Jesus` intention to bring conflict with it by then calling all remarriage adultery, which it appears He does with the words "he that marries a divorced women commits adultery" ? But if He was saying as Weiland asserts "he that marries her that is put away(not properly divorced) commits adultery" then for me it makes sense of some scriptures that dont appear to line up. Weiland says that alot of christians get it wrong because they do not understand that the not one jot of the law has been done away with, but he is not talking about all the traditions of man or the cultural and cerimonial laws that God gave only to Israel. I tend to think he is right when he says Jesus will not contradict the Father, remembering that as David said under inspiration,"thy law is perfect"IMO means that God will not and infact cannot rescind a moral law, as it is based on whats moral and good and not arbitually given. Smd did you read the article carefully, i need proofs that he is right or wrong.

I briefly read one of his articles on divorce and not sure that I agree with his argument. It sounds like he is saying that God does not hate divorce but only hates those who put away their wives with out a written divorce. I think he is having to stretch a lot of scriptures to make that connection. I believe God hates divorce in general whither its written or not. Divorce wrecks havoc on families especially the children of divorced parents. I couldn't imagine God being anything but displeased the with Divorce no matter if its legal divorce or an undocumented put away, both destroy lives. I would say this guys sounds like he is trying to justify written divorces as ok with God. I could be wrong, I have only read that one article. See example below: The King James Version translated Malachi 2:16 correctly: For Yehowah, the God of Israel saith that He hateth [the] putting away

Right on OneLight I was mainly thinking how slippery Satan was to get people like Ellen to think they were loving but that Christians were narrow minded and hateful. The look on her face and venom in her speech was quite striking to me, but as you say "bring it on". The Martyrs in other countries are known to not ask for prayer for deliverance but rather perseverance in preaching.

Would it be a crime to speak out against adult brother/sister marriage? It seems that it will depend on wether a group of people are offended and see it as hate, but i did see another post where the gay spokesperson was adamant it would not mean preachers would be censored. At this point it does seem to be mostly against hateful speech etc, which if we apply "do unto others..." then i too would want the law to protect me if others were hateful towards me with intent to harm?

Not really as although Jesus said divorce was not in Gods original intent, He did not dispute Moses authority to give allowance for divorce. So if divorce is acknowledged as legitimate by God through Moses then can it be adultery to remarry if properly divorced ? If divorce does not break the bond of marriage then those divorced would be in adultery and be guilty of capital offense. If Moses allowed divorce for any reason and God did not rebuke him for it we can only think that adultery is only if not divorced, but Jesus is saying if remarried except in the case of porenia/fornication then it is adultery. In other words divorce does not break the bond of a first marriage. Why also does only Mathew have an exception? in some places people only have pages of the bible and if reading Jesus` words in the other gospels would believe there was no exception. Have you read Ted Weilands article it easy to find on google ?

Thats so true LadyC, yet i think it is not long before truth becomes stranger than fiction, i.e the left behind series. My young children watched this and to this day say it has vividly stuck in their minds.

hi ya all, im probably behind the eight ball here in NZ as we get your programmes months later sometimes, but today while flicking channels, for some reason i decided to watch some of Ellen Whats her name, the lesbian, who has a tv show. Anyway they were talking about getting the hate law in place and i suddenly thought yeah, they are calling it love to accept sin and that anyone who rejects the behaviour of others is a hater. This is more than being against true hate or true hate speech with which i myself agree, but that no one can speak out against others choice of sexual behaviour or anything disagreeable to them. I know none of this is new but Satan is now more than ever coming as an angel of light/love and using the media to portray Christians as haters. Its the "left behind" movie in reality. Hold on folks its not long till we get to go home, and for some it in the west it will mean being martyred.

No, it is us that was seperated and was freed from the law in order that we can be remarried again as you've been forgiven from all past sins. So no, he is not divorced. The scripture in Romans 7:4 should bring comfort to those who have been divorced before as it is Christ who has released us from the law through his death. Like those in this chapter the law was in effect as the marriage contract by law. But if the spouse died then the marriage contract by law was no longer in effect for they were free to remarry and Christ died releasing us through Christ from being bound any longer to make our own decision. hi OC did you read the Ted Weilands article on it, i think its important to calmly look at all the evidences provided before commenting unless you want to enlighten me of my questions in OP.

Me too Botz Perhaps OC can elaborate, as for Smalcald i think he was asking if Ted Weiland was a divorced person ? I dont know.

Im not really wanting opinions, nor am i trying to assert anything one way or the other. Ive turned over a new leaf What im asking is, is he correct about the use of the words "Keriythuwth" meaning "Divorce" and "Shalach" meaning "Put away" in the OT and in the NT "Apostasion" meaning "Divorce" and "Apolusse meaning "Put away" ? Also any opinions/light shed on the other questions i have voiced. I would like comment on the testimony of J M Humphries on the "Spirit of Hosea" website. It is very striking and does not appear to be the words of a rash man. Keep in mind that he wrestled with the issue for two years before making the descision he did.