Marriage Definition

[Openly Curious]

'Sherman'

Ok, I agree that marriage ends at death; but are you also trying to say that this scripture teaches that death is the "ONLY" way marriages end and that marriages can not end in divorce?

No, I am saying that the scripture is showing to us that those who enter into a marriage are joined together by the law and as long as both partners are alive then God views them as one and the law is binding. For it is God's will for two to stay married till death do them part but people who do not want to follow the will of God can go against the will of God out of the hardness of their hearts and get a divorce as it is allowed in the land but it is not the will of God as what God has joined together let no man put asunder.

And please don't misunderstand me and think that I'm advocating divorce; marriages should last for life, especially those whom God has joined together. I'm simply pointing out that scripturally marriages end either with the death of the spouse or in divorce. Sadly, the traditional doctrine of marriage has errantly said that marriage is indissoluble, as in unbreakable. But even Jesus' directive to not tear apart what God has joined together implies that it is possible to tear apart, not impossible. Just like we should not commit murder, why? Because if I was to murder someone, they would be dead. In like manner, Jesus' command to not divorce implies that divorce is possible, not impossible. And divorce is the legal end of a marriage covenant.

Now on the same token it is a death that took place being Christ's death that set us free from the law of sin and death in which we were under bondage to being the old covenant that could never make us righteous but the death of Christ set us free and his shed blood brought into effect the new covenant in which we became one with Christ and joined to his side as we have been espoused to Christ and what God has joined together let know man put asunder Romans 7:4 as we have been joined to Christ by the blood that brought the new covenant into effect and now we are under the new covenant that gives us greater promises than that of the old covenant because it could not make us righteous on Christ could do that.

Also Christ will never ever die so the covenant between us and He will never ever be disannulled but will be binding all through out eternity without end as we will forever be with Christ joined with Him bone of His bone and flesh of His flesh. As what God has cleansed let no man call common or unclean. This is the truth that apostle Paul is trying to convey and get across to us by using the marriage relationship and how they are bound by law as long as they both are alive but once one dies then they are no longer bound under the law but freed.

OC

[JIME]

THe key words here are what God has put together. Not all marraiges were put together by God and if they aren't they will fail. God doesn't consider it marraige either if he doesn't put it together.

The phrase "what God has put together" is a key phrase implying that there are marriages that God has not joined together. But that doesn't mean that the couple is not married, but that God is not in or behind the relationship. Such marriages should thus be broken - divorce, like in Ezra when God commanded the Israelites to put away their pagan wives. They had married but it was against the will of God, but they were married.

"What God has joined together."

I think that this phrase is misinterpreted most of the time. People think that if God didn't put the two people together, that they can easily divorce. I disagree, and here is why: When people get married, they make their vows public before man and God. Thus "God has joined together" the couple.

It started with Adam & Eve: Gen 2:23-24 (NLT)

23

Edited March 22, 2007 by JIME

[Sherman]

JIME, I agree that vows are important. But if one makes a vow that is against the will of the Lord, then one should repent of making that vow and certainly should not keep that vow. If a person makes a vow to commit murder, should they keep that vow? Of course not. But one should not lightly use this as an easy, very subjective way to justify their divorce saying that, well God never intended for us to marry. Of course we need to keep our vows, especially our vows of marriage.

Concerning the Mal.2.16 passage commonly interpreted "I hate divorce says God", a better translation of the passage reveals that God was chastening them for the "hateful divorce." This is an element of the cultural context that I believe I've shared in other posts in this thread, if not, I'll gladly repost them later on this thread. In Israel there were two basic types of divorce, those precipitated by morally acceptable reasons, and those precipitated by selfish reasons. The later were called "hateful divorces." I'll post more later.

Blessings,

Sherman

[firehill]

Exellent post, foc.

[None]

Is God hardhearted?

Or is this hardheartedness NOT about the punishment inflicted upon the GUILTY, but only about callouslessly, hardheartedly punishing the INNOCENT ?

Jesus was asked...'can we divorce for EVERY cause'. Precisely what was going on.

Its not the divorce that is automatically the sin...it is the CAUSE of the divorce that is the sin.

If she commits whoredom, then THAT is the sin that causes the divorce. If a spouse divorces for no just cause, then like the Jews, it is 'hardheartedness' that is the sin causing the divorce.

Divorce is not sin by default...otherwise God Himself was sinning against Israel by threatening divorce and actually giving her a bill of divorce.

Divorce itself, is not 'hardhearted' by default, or again, we must say God is hardhearted when He gave Israel a bill of divorce (whether or not the covenant was ended then or not..the point is His word does show Him threatening divorce)...and we KNOW God does not have a hard heart.

In answer to the question above:"Is God hardhearted?"

No, He is not.

Hosea 4:14

14 "I will not punish your daughters

when they turn to prostitution,

nor your daughters-in-law

when they commit adultery,

because the men themselves consort with harlots

and sacrifice with shrine prostitutes

[Sherman]

None, no worries about hijacking this thread; I thought it was dead.

And FoC, your logic mystifies me. The hardheartedness of man is the reason God inspired Moses to legislate the bill of divorce; it wasn't the hardheartedness of God. The hardheartedness of man is the universal, transcultural reason why God inspired Moses to legislate (command) the bill of divorce. God recognized that because of sin, the fall of man, and our selfish nature, marriage relationships had the potential of devolving into a toxic, even deadly, state - thus necessitating the breaking of such marriages, freeing the parties to build new, hopefully healthier, marriages. Sin leads to death - spiritual, physical, and relational.

The culturally specific reason God inspired Moses to institute the bill of divorce was to stop the practice of men abandoning/expelling their wives and yet retaining control over them. In the ancient near-east though a man abandoned/expelled his wife, if she married another man, or was married off to another man by her father, the second marriage was not legal and thus actually adulterous. The first husband had the legal right to reclaim her if he so desired, though it was years later, and though she had had children with the second "husband". The first husband could even legally claim any children from his wifes 2nd "illegal marriage" as his own if he so desired. This was an wicked evil sadistic common cultural practice in the ancient near east that God intended to stop and not be done amoung His chosen people Israel - civil law inspired by God and enforsed by local community-elected judges.

So the cultural reason God inspired Moses to legislate the bill of divorce was to stop the practice of men abandoning/expelling their wives (yet retaining legal right over them) causing them to commit adultery, and the men that marries them (seperated but not divorced) to commit adultery. David, Michal, and Palti (1 Sam.19.9-17, 25.43-44, 2 Sam.3.15-16) are examples of this deviant practice. David abandons Michal. Her father King Saul gave her to Palti as his wife. David later reclaimes her some 15 years later. David did this in connection with taking the throne of Israel, though he had already married 2 other women - seemingly selfish, even political, reasons to me. In contrast, Palti exibited great love for Michal by debasing himself as a man, following along behind the military caravan crying that his wife was being taken from him, following and crying all the way from their home to the border of Judah where he was finally told by General Abner to stop following them because they were going into David's territory.

The purpose of the bill of divorce was to stop things like this from happening in Israel. If a man abandoned or expelled his wife, he was to give her a bill of divorce, and if she married another man, her now ex-husband could not reclaim her or remarry her even if her 2nd husband divorced her too or died. When the Pharisees ask Jesus "Why did Moses legislate the bill of divorce (put away a wife with a bill of divorce)?" Jesus explained that God inspired Moses to legislate the bill of divorce because of the hardheartedness of men, and to stop the practice of men abandoning/expelling their wives causing them to commit adultery and the men that marries them to commit adultery. It did this by bringing a proper legal end (divorce) to the marriage covenant, freeing such abandoned women to marry again legally.

But, this is a whole big discussion for another thread. I'll be out of town for awhile so I don't know how much I'll be online to discuss this further the next couple of weeks.

Blessings,

Sherman

Edited July 7, 2007 by Sherman