Remarriage after divorce

[another_poster]

 

If scripture gives a specific reason for a matter to be a decisive rule for that matter and no other beyond that, then we simply cannot make up another reason to decide that matter. Everything else is in danger of walking out of God's will into sin.

In this case Jesus Himself even stated explicitly that this is to be the reason that rules to decide this matter and Paul led by the Holy Spirit stated the only other one found in God's word under this New Covenant. And Jesus even gave an explanation to why that is:

Because people out of their hardened hearts were giving all kinds of reasons why they wanted to divorce their spouse (under Moses), so He said that this will not work like that anymore and He made a stricter rule, which was even given from the beginning, but temporarily changed under the old Law.

 

Isn't it interesting though that Jesus said this is the ONLY reason and then later Paul gives another reason. Guess Jesus must have been wrong or perhaps it really isn't as clear as people think.

 

Perhaps if you care to re-read my posts you will see a question that nobody has addressed yet in this thread.

 

Edit to add: In the couple of hours between when I wrote this reply and when I actually posted it inchrist has responded to the question

Edited September 25, 2014 by another_poster

[another_poster]

A woman or wife is not a slave and that is not what I meant. A husband and wife are one. A slave and master are not. Yet the slave is not permitted to leave if "abused". This was the question I was answering. If abuse was a good reason for divorce. And certainly not for remarriage. Nothing more nothing less.

Remember use scriptures like the original poster asked please. This is getting sloppy and I'd rather stay on topic. Explain a case for divorce and remarriage with scripture or we have worn the topic out. 

I was thinking earlier today that I should ask about why you have come to that conclusion. Then I come here to find that you have! So thanks it is much appreciated.  I don't agree because as I said earlier the reasons for being in those situations in the first place are different. See a slave is there because they owe a debt. They become a slave because they can't pay. So if they leave before their time is up then they have not paid their debt and they have to go straight back into slavery to that very person. There is no obligation in marriage that causes them to be there is the first place. 

[another_poster]

 

Are you reiterating your comparison?

 

It's not in the Bible...it may be your personal belief, but it is not in the Bible.  That comparison is not in the Bible. and so on

 

Oh, I use scripture all the time....but I prefer to keep it in context

 

 

BTW, I am not angry or hurt or offended...not all all...

Good point Seven.

"We must not seek to bind the consciences of other Believers with the private convictions that arise out of our personal walk with God. Even if you believe God has led you in developing those convictions, you still must not elevate them to the level of spiritual principles for everyone else to follow." - Jerry Bridges

 

 

actually I think Seven has misunderstood what faith pleases God was saying. She was not saying they are the same kind of relationship. She clearly explained her view. For seven to then ask if she is making the comparison again is to not have read properly what she said. I disagree with faith pleases God's understanding but I do not wish to see her misrepresented.

[gdemoss]

There is no simple answer. Was the bible created for man or man for the bible? According to Paul the things that were written down were for our learning. When I was immature in my faith I was very perverse and legalistic in my application of the scriptures to any life situation. Everything God did has been out of love as God is love. There is a time to marry, a time to divorce, a time to remarry as well as a time to stay unmarried after divorce. Love is the answer. One might think that divorce and remarriage can never be the way of love. Let that one alone to live by their conscience. For them to do so cannot be love. Love has done a great many things. Love sent a whole nation into captivity and dispersed among the nations. Love flooded a world to save 8 people alive. Love knows when to say when. Love knows when to say yes or no. Follow after love in everything. We live in perilous times and love demands we act according to the best interest of all involved including ourselves. So whatever we do with marriage, divorce and remarriage it must be done in love. Let no man tell you that you cannot do what love demands because of some silly legalistic narrow view of God through a personal perception of scripture viewed as dogma because they think so. Live according to love as God gives you ability. Wouldn't it be grand if no one ever divorced? God bless all who marry!

I get what you are saying and in many cases things need to be balanced out, but this is very dangerous ground you are walking on with this. What does legalistic really mean? Yes we do need to do everything in love, but we need to do it with God's will and word in mind - always! Love demands to follow scripture - God's will - to the best way we can, especially where scripture is known for a matter:

John 14:15, 21

If you love Me, keep My commandments.

He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him.

John 15:10If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.

1 John 5:1-3 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him. ² By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. ³ For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

This is written all over the Bible. God really emphasizes to keep scripture, by this we know that we are walking in Love. If we are not "legalistic" the way I understand it you are using the term, then we can very easily be off track and on a dangerous course where our deceived and sometimes wicked hearts lead us to, especially when our minds are not renewed and we think we are walking in love, so it must be the right way, so let's take scripture not so seriously (it's an easy pitfall this way).... - In the end we have to be guided by/through (rightly applied!) scripture to be in the will of God, because that's were the will of God is known and should we get a personal word from God, it still has to line up with scripture.

Again, scripture is very clear when divorce is allowed, that was not so much my original question (except the one about the remarried couples). Any other way or form that we veer away from that or make up our own rules (when and what is allowed and create special cases) we are in danger of walking off the path into sin.

And this is why I started this thread, to find out the truth behind the issue of remarriage so not to veer off into a path that is out of God's will, not only for me, but most likely millions of others that are confronted with the same questions (who also want to do the right thing), since with this issue of remarriage it is not so clear in some cases, but it is very clear in others (e.g.divorce) and where that is known we have to abide by it, because if we don't, then we are actually walking OUTSIDE of Love - since the opposite is also true:" He who does not keep my commandments does NOT love Me and is NOT abiding in My love!"

Jesus faced this very same problem. People were believing that they could be righteous because they followed the law even the ten commandments and he corrected them and their legalism. You say that I am walking on very dangerous ground and I agree with you as people wanted to kill Jesus because he said the things I do in principle. The more 'religious' people are the quicker they are to see the truth as a lie. Jesus would protect a woman caught in the very act of adultry of whom her infraction was confirmed by eye witnesses yet those who know this would cast out those who are caught up in divorce and don't do exactly what is 'commanded' in scripture. Was it not commanded to keep the Sabbath holy? Did not David, Jesus disciples break the Sabbath? Doesn't the Scripture say that they saw Jesus had broken tge Sabbath? But I say unto you that love is what is commanded of us. Love as defined by God as God is love. I am learning about love everyday. Love is that which preserves life instead of destroying it. I have been a liar, thief, cheat, con, adulterer, idolater, murderer, blasphemer, persecuter of the righteous and much much more yet today Jesus stands at the right hand of the father making intercession for me.

My problem in my ignorance was that I did not understand the difference between cannot and will not as it pertained to sin. I am not giving people license to do as they will concerning marriage, divorce and remarriage but I am standing for each and every persons right to do as they truly believe God would have them do out of love. There is a time to kill and a time to heal. God is judge. God is love. Trust in God.

[Sevenseas]

 

As your wife committed adultery, even the naysayers against divorce would agree you can remarry.  In fact many would state adultery is THE reason for being allowed to divorce

and remarry.

 

The Bible also states that if the unbeliever wishes to leave...let them...Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.  I Cor 7:15

 

However, I have no problem with you wanting her to stay...I can understand that.

 

That's the black and white answer...and this is not hypothetical for many here..

 

Just to quickly interject here, I think you answered you own question/statement here that you stated in the prior post.

If scripture gives a specific reason for a matter to be a decisive rule for that matter and no other beyond that, then we simply cannot make up another reason to decide that matter. Everything else is in danger of walking out of God's will into sin.

In this case Jesus Himself even stated explicitly that this is to be the reason that rules to decide this matter and Paul led by the Holy Spirit stated the only other one found in God's word under this New Covenant. And Jesus even gave an explanation to why that is:

Because people out of their hardened hearts were giving all kinds of reasons why they wanted to divorce their spouse (under Moses), so He said that this will not work like that anymore and He made a stricter rule, which was even given from the beginning, but temporarily changed under the old Law.

 

 

 

Uh...no....

 

I answered fire's post....NOT the op.  You are drawing conclusions here and not representing my post

 

I have given my thoughts on the matter throughout this thread.

 

I have not altered my position.

 

I am starting to get irritated by those who want to jam their take on one verse into everyone elses' life.

[Sevenseas]

 

 

My problem in my ignorance was that I did not understand the difference between cannot and will not as it pertained to sin. I am not giving people license to do as they will concerning marriage, divorce and remarriage but I am standing for each and every persons right to do as they truly believe God would have them do out of love. There is a time to kill and a time to heal. God is judge. God is love. Trust in God. 

 

here here!

[Warrior777]

There has been much division in this thread, and it is not surprising.

I think this couple needs to turn to God and find the answer.

Not the flesh, and not man, but God himself.

And he does not leave us void of answers for everything in our lives.

This couple ultimately has to make the decision for themselves.

And they should ask God's guidance.

I have found three verses to help them.

 

1. James 1:5;

"If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you".

 

2. Psalm 37:4;

"Take delight in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart".

 

3. Proverbs 3:5-6;

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight".

 

Which couple specifically are you referring to? 

My earlier point was that there has to be a rule that guides this matter one way or another, God is not a respecter of persons. One just can't give their blessing to one couple remarrying and not to another, when their situations are pretty much the same. There is too much at stake, running of finto a direction that easily could be out of God's will and into sin. Then they don't know that they need to repent of it, because it is not seen as sin, since a church gave it's blessings to something they should not have...

[Warrior777]

 

My two cents worth on the subject...

 

Malachi 2:13-16 — The concept of divorce

 

To start I wish to address the issue when quoting this verse, that the belief has been God hates divorce....but this is not true due to the bad translation of this verse....there is not a shred of textual evidence that the text ever read “I” [ykna], for the phrase "I hate Divorce".

 

The true interpretation is as follows:

 

Malachi 2:14 ‐16 teaches us that God regards wrongful divorce as a sin of treachery against one’s wife and against Himself. Although God hates wrongful divorce, He neither hates all divorces in the same way nor hates every aspect of divorce.

 

He hates what occasions every divorce. He hates the results that often flow to children and to the injured parties of divorce. And God hates divorces wrongly obtained on grounds that He has not permitted.

 

Jesus’ comments on divorce reinforce this conclusion. He specifically recognized it as constituting a change from God’s original plan: “but from the beginning it was not so,” and then it was only because of hardness of heart that the Holy Spirit through Moses allowed divorce (Mat.19:8).

 

Jeremiah 3:1-8, 12-13 - God divorced Israel yet continues His appeal for her to return.

 

The God who cannot sin divorced His wife. Since God cannot do wrong, divorce cannot be inherently sinful; otherwise God would have sinned in divorcing Israel, who played the whore.

 

Regulations of Divorce & Remarriage

 

Deuteronomy 24:1-4

 

1.When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a bill of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house,

2 And when she departs out of his house she goes and marries another man,

3 And if the latter husband dislikes her and writes her a bill of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies, who took her as his wife,

4 Then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife after she is defiled. For that is an abomination before the Lord; and you shall not bring guilt upon the land which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance.

 

Please note: If a remarriage to a third party does not occur, the original pair may be reunited in marriage, as is evident from God’s invitation to North Israel to return to Him (Jer. 3:12-13). In fact, the goal of any divorced person whose spouse has not remarried should be to experience the grace of God in healing the breach and the reuniting of the divorced couple.

 

If the remarriage to a third party does occur, the original par may not reunite in marriage, as that would be an abomination before the Lord.

 

Does remarriage after a divorce constitute a real marriage in God’s eyes?

 

John 4:16 He said to her, “Go, call your husband and come here.” 17 The woman answered and said,“I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “You have correctly said, ‘I have no husband’; 18 for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly.”

 

Please Note: The woman had been divorced and remarried five times, for whatever reasons, did not nullify the fact that each remarriage constituted, in God’s eyes, a real marriage.

 

The issue was the fact that the woman had not remarried for the sixth time, but was living in immorality with another man, teaches that co-habitation does not constitute a marriage.

 

Remarriage = On-going Adultery?

 

Matthew 5:32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

 

Please Note; - It is true that the Greek present tense often indicates on‐going action. It is not true, however, that the present tense always indicates on‐going action. Both lexical and contextual factors in Matthew 5:32 indicate that the present tense was used in order to make a statement that is timeless and universally true, and that it was not used to indicate that the actions involved were ongoing.

 

Rather the establishment of a second marriage covenant (not sexual union in the second marriage) breaks the first marriage covenant which is why Jesus calls it adultery. Thus sexual union within a second marriage is not adulterous. This conclusion fits well with Jesus’ distinction between the Samaritan woman’s five husbands and current live‐in, as well as making sense of why the OT did not regard sexual union within a second marriage as adultery deserving the death penalty.

 

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 - Believers are not to divorce

 

Please Note:- The command not to separate stands; but (Paul says) if the wife disobeys this command (and presumably, this holds for the husband too) and does separate from her husband,

she must remain unmarried so that she will be in a position at all times to repent and be reconciled to her husband. If she marries another, Deut. 24:1‐4 would apply.

 

1 Corinthians 7:12-16 - What about the unequally yoked?

 

A believer must not divorce (ἀφίημι) an unbelieving partner who is willing to make a go of their marriage. Indeed, the believer is told to do all he or she can to hold the marriage together for the sake of the unbelieving partner (hoping he/she will come to know Christ through continued association with the believer) and for the sake of the children (who if taken out of the believer’s care would be counted and treated as pagans, i.e., “unclean”).

 

 

First of all thank you for your two cents, every penny counts..lol.

 

But I have a few questions that I have to ask, not to contradict what you are saying but for further understanding and clarity.

 

To Malachi

 

Do you have any further proof that the text you mentioned was mistranslated and is there a translation that corrected that?

 

About God sinning, I think the rule of adultery (that Jesus is also mentioning) would apply here, since Jesus said that in this case a divorce (and remarriage) would not be sin. I also believe that God had no other choice in this matter, anyways He already had a reconciliation in mind down the road, when He sent Jesus. Of course this was not God's perfect will, and I still think He hated to do that but again, had to.

 

Regulations of Divorce & Remarriage

 

Now this mostly deals with a remarriage to the same ex-wife when she remarried or didn't in the meanwhile.

 

"If the remarriage to a third party does occur, the original par may not reunite in marriage, as that would be an abomination before the Lord." -- Now on a side note: I always wondered why this is seen as a greater abomination or even as such, when marrying someone that has been divorced from another partner before seems to be not so much a problem (under OT conditions at least)? Would it not be better, at least to finally reconcile instead of taking another woman, who also was another man's wife before? Where is the logic there or let's say what makes it such a problem or what is the difference before God, is there a deeper reasoning for it?

 

Does remarriage after a divorce constitute a real marriage in God’s eyes?

 

This is a good point you are bringing up here and I heard about this before, but my question would be, is that still under the old law that Moses allowed to give letters of divorce, which the Samaritan woman would fall under in this case, therefore under that law those indeed were all legal divorces with legal remarriages? It seems though as Jesus makes a new rule (or brings back the original one) that divorce should not be, at least not that easy and only permitted if actually adultery occurred, under the new covenant? But the remarks He made to the woman was about a situation, that was applicable at that time she lived in. He also seems to not make a real judgment about it, just states the current and past situation of the woman to let her know that He knows about her, giving a word of knowledge.

 

 

Remarriage = On-going Adultery?

 

So if I understand this right then even though that the second marriage covenant is ongoing, it is only adultery at the time it is created, but the covenant itself that is continuing is not continuing to be in adultery? (Not talking about the sexual unions here, though for a marriage covenant to be valid there has to be a sexual union - at least the first one). Does this mean that the sexual union alone, let's say before a second marriage, but after the first one would not be considered adultery then which would break the first covenant with the first husband?

 

Also my reasoning about the death penalty for adultery in second marriages would not be an issue under the OT, since there was still a legal letter of divorce, which makes it a bit complicated to take some situations into the new covenant, since the rules for it changed.

 

This would also bring us to a point/question I mentioned earlier: If there was a divorce for another reason than adultery and one spouse had left to marry another, is that still considered adultery then against the first spouse, that would therefore in effect break the marriage covenant before God? So is in that case the remarriage of the first spouse legally allowed to remarry, who had been divorced by their leaving partner? In other words, does the exception rule of adultery apply also in this case that Jesus had mentioned?

[Warrior777]

 

 

If scripture gives a specific reason for a matter to be a decisive rule for that matter and no other beyond that, then we simply cannot make up another reason to decide that matter. Everything else is in danger of walking out of God's will into sin.

In this case Jesus Himself even stated explicitly that this is to be the reason that rules to decide this matter and Paul led by the Holy Spirit stated the only other one found in God's word under this New Covenant. And Jesus even gave an explanation to why that is:

Because people out of their hardened hearts were giving all kinds of reasons why they wanted to divorce their spouse (under Moses), so He said that this will not work like that anymore and He made a stricter rule, which was even given from the beginning, but temporarily changed under the old Law.

 

Isn't it interesting though that Jesus said this is the ONLY reason and then later Paul gives another reason. Guess Jesus must have been wrong or perhaps it really isn't as clear as people think.

 

Perhaps if you care to re-read my posts you will see a question that nobody has addressed yet in this thread.

 

Edit to add: In the couple of hours between when I wrote this reply and when I actually posted it inchrist has responded to the question

 

 

Well I get your point somewhat, but just because Paul expounds on what Jesus said and maybe clarifies a case that Jesus did not mention closer, does not mean that it contradicts it. You also have to see that Paul was lead by the Holy Spirit to write this, pretty much God saying it anyways, since it became also scripture. I just wish he would have explained some things even further, but that does not mean that we can go ahead and just make up what we feel like or what seems just plausible to us, without extracting what we know from scripture about a matter and comparing each scripture with it. In any case where scripture is not quite clear, a decision must be made that is in light and principle of scripture nonetheless, in connection with the known will of God and the nature of it.

Now my point actually was, in cases where scripture is known we have to abide by it and definitely can't sway outside of it, making up further rules or regulations that scripture therefore does not allow, since it would contradict it. And in the case of what Paul is saying this is also part of scripture that is known.

[Warrior777]

 

 

Perhaps if you care to re-read my posts you will see a question that nobody has addressed yet in this thread.

 

Edit to add: In the couple of hours between when I wrote this reply and when I actually posted it inchrist has responded to the question

 

 

Sorry, could you write your question again, there was a lot to read and I had to respond to many people, if the question wasn't directed to one of my quotes I either did not pick up on it or I might have answered it in one of my posts/answers to other quotes/questions. Did you read all my posts to see if I might have touched your subject you are referring to? If I did, then I most likely have not posted an additional answer to it again. Thanks.