Remarrying after a Divorce....is it forbidden?

[firehill]

Not to butt in, but does this passage have any bearing on this at all?

But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

(Mat 20:25-28)

Yes it does. it speaks volumes.

I have to admit I dont agree with the other posters assessment. I believe it applies to us even now.

Butero's response:

That has to do with our position in the Kingdom of God. If we want to be great there, we will minister to other's needs. We won't be seeking position like James and John, wanting to sit on the Lord's right and left hand when entering his Kingdom. Instead, because of our service, we will simply be promoted to the office God desires.

You are mistaken.

But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

(Mat 20:25-28)

1 Peter

5:2 Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers - not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve;

5:3 not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.

[Guest drbelitz]

here is a short set of writings concerning the churches teaching on divorce. enjoy, it covers every aspect about divorce throughout the history of Christianity.

Divorce (in Moral Theology)

This subject will be treated here under two distinct heads: First, divorce in moral theology; second, divorce in civil jurisprudence.

The term divorce (divortium, from divertere, divortere, "to separate") was employed in pagan Rome for the mutual separation of married people. Etymologically the word does not indicate whether this mutual separation included the dissolution of the marriage bond, and in fact the word is used in the Church and in ecclesiastical law in this neutral signification. Hence we distinguish between divortium plenum or perfectum (absolute divorce), which implies the dissolution of the marriage bond, and divortium imperfectum (limited divorce), which leaves the marriage bond intact and implies only the cessation of common life (separation from bed and board, or in addition separation of dwelling-place). In civil law divorce means the dissolution of the marriage bond; divortium imperfectum is called separation (s

[anitarose]

(previous quotation deleted for brevity)

Which means what.....I need an explanation that isn't out of the Dark Ages...

Anita

[Guest drbelitz]

And here is the very words of an early church father himself

http://divorceandremarriage.bravehost.com/notallecfs.html

Tertullian 150ad - ~230ad

"The Creator, however, except on account of adultery, does not put asunder what He Himself joined together, the same Moses in another passage enacting that he who had married after violence to a damsel, should thenceforth not have it in his power to put away his wife.

"Divorce, therefore, when justly deserved, has even in Christ a defender"

"He prohibits divorce when He will have the marriage inviolable;

He permits divorce when the marriage is spotted with unfaithfulness"

false, and no church ever taught this. Show me a church in the first 1500 years that interpreted scripture this way. there was not one, and for good reason, because it is a protestant lie, and the worldy way.

no valid marriage can be divorced in the sight of God, only civally to protect a person(s) from harm. neither perso can remarry or have relations with anyone else any longer after this civl seperation.

They are married til the death of one.

thats the way it was and always will be.

[LadyRaven]

(previous quotation deleted for brevity)

Which means what.....I need an explanation that isn't out of the Dark Ages...

Anita

Or so long that...

a. It's longer that stuff I post

and

b. So long that it's confusing

[Guest drbelitz]

I think it was Chesterton who said that he didn't think people these days were intelligent enough to be converted. I guess this may be true.

In Christian marriage, which implies the restoration, by Christ Himself, of marriage to its original indissolubility, there can never be an absolute divorce, at least after the marriage has been consummated;

Non-Christian marriage can be dissolved by absolute divorce under certain circumstances in favour of the Faith;

Christian marriage before consummation can be dissolved by solemn profession in a religious order, or by an act of papal authority;

Separation from bed and board (divortium imperfectum) is allowed for various causes, especially in the case of adultery or lapse into infidelity or heresy on the part of husband or wife.

These propositions we shall explain in detail.

A. In Christian marriage, which implies the restoration, by Christ Himself, of marriage to its original indissolubility, there can never be an absolute divorce, at least after the marriage has been consummated.

Edited September 10, 2006 by drbelitz

[Snowdrop]

quoting Cherishedfaith: So is God's word clear on which party is permitted to remarry? Are both free to remarry because that one act of unfaithfulness severed that bond?

Hi Cherishedfaith,

After reading the responses you've gotten, I hope you're getting answers to your questions. I respectfully ask you consider another option, not mentioned in your quote. As a few others have eluded to, I have to agree that ONLY death seperates an original couple.

When a person sins against their marriage covenant, it doesn't 'break' what GOD has 'made one'. Has the adulterous offender broken their promise to their spouse? Absolutely. Has GOD'S creation of one flesh been broken? No- only death does that.

[redeemed098]

Dr Belitz...

Short set of Writings.. I'd hate to see Long..!!

Regards,

Ben.

[Guest kephasrock]

Great points O.C. I would say however that the only clearly Biblical positions given for re-marriage after divorce is fornication and abandonment.

So you believe that EVERY possible contingency is covered in Gods word?

That there is NOTHING that is either forbidden or permitted that isnt in mentioned in there?

How about contraception ? sin or not? Prove it with the Bible, not your opinion.

smoking..... sin or not? Prove it with the Bible, not your opinion.

Video games... sin or not? HOw about if theyre violent....Prove it with the Bible, not your opinion.

Do you believe since these arent covered specifically that we can use the 'spirit' of the law' to determine what might be 'right' in these areas?

The fact is Jesus said ONLY for sexual sin do you NOT commit adultery upon remarriage....so either Paul contradicted our Lord, or Paul wasnt offering any 'remarriage' in his allowing this person to leave......OR...

Paul understood what our Lord was dealing with with the Jews and that particular situation where they were putting away their spouses very frivlously and knew He didnt mean there were no other breaches of covenant.

YOu have two choices really.

Accept that there are other breaches of covenant even beyond desertion (ex. abuse) and that divorce ENDS this 'law of the husband" entirely when its for one of these breaches, and thus the reason why Paul could make an additional concession for desertion

Or take the legalistic route believing that EVERY contingency is covered in Gods word in which case you cannot even allow for remarriage after anything other than divorcing for sexual sin because THAT is the ONLY case where Jesus said you DONT commit adultery upon remarriage.

is there more to the story or not?

Divorce and re-marriage is clearly covered in scripture. Jesus gave only one valid reason for divorce and re-marriage and that is fornication. Paul was speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit when writing to the Corinthian Church and mentions a scenerio not mentioned by Christ, but still valid for divorce, which is abandonment of a believer by an unbeliever. My position is that with regard to any situation outside of these two given in the Bible, I don't have the authority as God's ambassador to say it is ok, and neither does anyone else. If someone is in a situation outside of these two mentioned, and they seek God and decide he approves of them getting re-married after a divorce, I would not condemn them, but would caution them to make sure God is really ok with it because they will ultimately stand before the one who has the authority to justify or condemn them, Christ Jesus. We are told in scripture to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. As such, nobody has to answer to me for the choices they make, just God. My only objective is to relate what scripture says about a certain matter and then ultimately the hearer must decide what to do with that information.

I do believe most things are found in scripture, either directly or indirectly as to the right and wrong of them. It is not a matter of having to prove them to your satisfaction. It is a matter of an individual seeking God's Word for themselves to get the truth as it relates to their choices in life. They don't do this for the benefit of how others will view them. They should do this because of concern for their eternal souls. I do believe there are indirect things in scripture that could give clues as to how God would view any subject, but one must be willing to accept those answers for themselves.

Oh, and by the way, I do not believe there is any such thing as legalism as is taught by people today. The anti-legalism doctrine is false. In the book of Galatians, Paul addresses only issues of ceremonial laws that dealt with Israel's separation from the unclean gentile nations. Since the gentiles have now received acceptance through faith in Christ, these laws are no longer in effect. People are taking this to the extreme and claiming that teaching we must conform to God's laws is wrong and therefore "legalistic." This is a lie and I absolutely reject any argument that based on that position.

if most things are found in scripture, then show me where the salvation of babies is, or of unborn aborted babies is.

The Bible is not a full catechism(intructional), the apostles and their successsors filled in the blanks with the authority of God to do so.

Divorce in the protestant model was never taught before the 16th century, and for good reason, it was not true.

[billie]

Kepha, read the story of King David's first child with Bathsheba. Compare that to the story of his son Absalom's death.