Marriage & Divorce question

March 13, 2008

And what exactly is it that consumates this marriage? What exactly is it in which this "one flesh" comes to be?

The concept of a marriage being "consumated" by sex is not to be found in scripture. It is an invention of the Catholic church as part of the annulment doctrine which was invented to get around the false doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage, which the church invented around the 12th century by declaring marriage a sacrement. The church had to find a way to say that you were never really married to begin with, to let people out of fraudulent marriages. What a spiders web!

Marriage is a covenant relationship. In Malachi 2:14, we find one of many examples describing marriage is a covenant. The marriage is "consumated" if you will when the marriage vows are taken. If after the marraige ceremony you never have sex, you're still married. If you buy a car and sign the contract, you own the car whether or not you ever drive it. Covenant is essentialy a fancy word for contract. The vows before God is what seals the deal, if you will.

Notice that Joseph had to divorce Mary to end the betrothal because of her suspected infidelity even though they had not had sex. That's because betrothal in those times was actually the beginning of the marriage. They had made their vows, the covenant was already made.

March 13, 2008

How about if someone commits murder, then repents. Should he then go free? No, he still has to go to prison.

Good Lord, woman. If a man hates his brother, should he have to go to prison too? Jesus said that he's the same as a murderer, right? Maybe we should pluck out our eyes when we see a beautiful woman and get a little excited too.

I say mercy rejoices agains judgment. Oh, that's right, the Bible does too.

Greg.

Edited March 13, 2008 by Greg Davies

Smalcald · March 13, 2008

In certain situations it is exactly compatible.
In your opinion.
Its never ok to steal and keep what we stole.
Ive never seen scripture that makes this comparison that you are making.
Its only false teachings that Ive ever seen try to use it.

The comparable situation is one of adultery; repentance means stopping and turning from your sin, it does not mean waiting things out.
your assuming that the new marriage is a state of adultery.
You have not proven that this is the case and the evidence shows otherwise.

How sorry are we for our adultery if we simply marry our lover; the very person who we chose over our vow to God Himself in order have sexual relations with, not even talking about our husband or wife?
And once MARRIED a marriage it is.
If it is 'unlawful' such as taking a brothers or fathers wife is as defined in the law, then we are to put this person away, but regardless of its beginnings, if this marriage is not defined as being unlawful IN Gods law itself, then there is no NT commandment to break it apart, Im afraid.

A marriage it is and should remain.

Now divorce can happen for any variety of very allowable and good reasons and people are certainly free to re-marry in those many other circumstances and in those circumstances it is certainly not comparable. The situation that is comparable is for the adulterer.
Adultery being 'committed' when we frivolously divorce and remarry in no way implies that any 'state' of adultery exists in this new marriage.
Without that being the case this new marriage IS a marriage and needs to be honored as such and the two people in that marriage need to stop sinning and live AS married people.

Hi Foc,

I am probably not being clear. I am not saying that someone who is divorced and remarried is living in a state of adultery.

My point was about someone who is married taking on another lover, cheating on their spouse. The question posed is that for that adulterer, where is the repentance if they NEVER quite cheating on their wife or husband? If you refuse to stop sinning will that sin go away eventually over time? Repentance in this case means you must leave your adultery you must STOP the adultery. Maintaining the adulterous relationship shows no repentance at all. What is really disgusting are the cases I have seen where the non-cheating husband or wife would indeed take the cheating spouse back if he or she would only stop the adultery they beg them to stop, but they won't give it up. Marrying the home wrecker in that case is not going to erase that lack of repentance by the cheater; in fact it basically confirms it. Now the marriage to the second person is as you say still a marriage and I do not advocate someone leaving thier marriage regardless of what number it is.

Now of course we can go into a whole bunch of complicated human scenarios people get themselves into. For example say some guy has an affair feels horrible; repents and STOPS the affair which is what repentance means. But because of the betrayal his wife simply cannot stay in the relationship; she divorces him as is her right in this case under scripture. This guy a couple of years later remarries somebody else. This is sad and not a good thing for his family, but I think is okay scripturally.

March 13, 2008

From many of the posts here, it sounds like Jesus and the New Testament writers needn't have said all those things about divorce and remarriage, as they can all be gotten around one way or another, and in the end, anything goes.

When the traditional doctrine of divorce is exposed for the religious mindset that it is and we become loosed from its bondage, it typically feels like what you have described. Which is one reason many resist the undermining of this traditional doctrine.

Here's the bottom line: A marriage begins when we covenant with each other making vows before the Lord. These vows from OT days until now have remained remarkably consistant. They are, in their simplest form, to feed, clothe, and love each other faithfully.

If one partner breaks a covenant vow and repents, the wronged partner must forgive. But if someone hardheartedly and unrepentantly continues to violate the vows of the covenant, then the wronged partner has the right, if they chose, to except that the covenant is broken, the marriage is dead and get a divorce which is the death certificate of the marriage. The marriage was killed by the sin of broken marriage vows.

The grounds for divorce which emanate from the marraige vows are sexual immoratlity, neglect, and abuse. These were the accepted grounds in all of first century Judaism. Jesus overtly upheld the sexual immorality ground in His debate with the Pharisees over the interpretation of Deut 24:1 (Matt 19:3-9) and it can be argued that He gave tacit approval to the neglect and abuse grounds because He never mentions them one way or another and Paul relied upon them for his council in I Cor 7.

God never intended for someone to be held in bondage and misery in a relationship with an unrepentant covenant breaker. The Lord Himself set the example when He gave Isreal a bill of divorce for the hardhearted and unrepentant breaking of their marriage covenant.

Greg.

Edited March 13, 2008 by Greg Davies

kat8585 · March 14, 2008

From many of the posts here, it sounds like Jesus and the New Testament writers needn't have said all those things about divorce and remarriage, as they can all be gotten around one way or another, and in the end, anything goes.

When the traditional doctrine of divorce is exposed for the religious mindset that it is and we become loosed from its bondage, it typically feels like what you have described. Which is one reason many resist the undermining of this traditional doctrine.

Here's the bottom line: A marriage begins when we covenant with each other making vows before the Lord. These vows from OT days until now have remained remarkably consistant. They are, in their simplest form, to feed, clothe, and love each other faithfully.

If one partner breaks a covenant vow and repents, the wronged partner must forgive. But if someone hardheartedly and unrepentantly continues to violate the vows of the covenant, then the wronged partner has the right, if they chose, to except that the covenant is broken, the marriage is dead and get a divorce which is the death certificate of the marriage. The marriage was killed by the sin of broken marriage vows.

The grounds for divorce which emanate from the marraige vows are sexual immoratlity, neglect, and abuse. These were the accepted grounds in all of first century Judaism. Jesus overtly upheld the sexual immorality ground in His debate with the Pharisees over the interpretation of Deut 24:1 (Matt 19:3-9) and it can be argued that He gave tacit approval to the neglect and abuse grounds because He never mentions them one way or another and Paul relied upon them for his council in I Cor 7.

God never intended for someone to be held in bondage and misery in a relationship with an unrepentant covenant breaker. The Lord Himself set the example when He gave Isreal a bill of divorce for the hardhearted and unrepentant breaking of their marriage covenant.

Greg.

I really don't see how your response addresses my post. I stand by my post.

kat8585 · March 15, 2008

I don't see how it can be a union that God has joined when one of them is divorced without biblical grounds. I don't see how it can ever be right

And can you see that a marriage can be 'right' if a woman committed adultery with another man and then married her former husbands murderer ?

Oddly enough GOD ended up accepting Davids and Bathshebas marriage even tho it had horrible beginnings.

In those days, a woman didn't say no to marriage, especially when it was the king asking.

kat8585 · March 15, 2008

For example let us say someone like Pastor Hagee who I do in general like. This is a guy who has done this exact thing and is now married to the women he committed adultery with as a pastor of his first congregation
I didn't know this. My respect for him just went way south. He should not be allowed to be a pastor, no matter how good a speaker he is.

I agree.

According I Cor 13 and Phil. 4:8, we should think the best and assume the best about our brothers and sisters. I don't know Pastor Hagee's heart or the details of what he did. So I'll assume that he has repented of any breaking of marraige vows he may have committed, and he has asked anyone's forgiveness if he transgressed against them, and he has had godly sorrow and the Lord has forgiven him. I believe then that the Blood has cleansed him thoroughly. Who are we to say he shouldn't then have the blessing of the Lord and a fruitful ministry? Will we judge another's servant?

Greg.

Anyone who knows the truth about this, and especially a pastor, who commits adultery, has an affair, then divorces their spouse, knowing full well all along what they are doing, but waits til after they marry the one they have committed adultery with to "repent", I have serious doubts about their "repentance". They have had plenty of time, and God will make sure they have plenty of guilt about it before they do it, so they are without excuse. Then, after all the pain the first spouse has suffered, God is going to just give them the green light, and they can go merrily on their way, while the wronged party is devastated, maybe for life? I hardly think so. Part of repentance is turning from the sin, not cementing it by marrying and being in a constant state of adultery. I fail to see how this could be a marriage in God's eyes. But people will find a way to justify anything if they want to do it.

Ddavid from NC · March 15, 2008

For example let us say someone like Pastor Hagee who I do in general like. This is a guy who has done this exact thing and is now married to the women he committed adultery with as a pastor of his first congregation
I didn't know this. My respect for him just went way south. He should not be allowed to be a pastor, no matter how good a speaker he is.

I agree.

According I Cor 13 and Phil. 4:8, we should think the best and assume the best about our brothers and sisters. I don't know Pastor Hagee's heart or the details of what he did. So I'll assume that he has repented of any breaking of marraige vows he may have committed, and he has asked anyone's forgiveness if he transgressed against them, and he has had godly sorrow and the Lord has forgiven him. I believe then that the Blood has cleansed him thoroughly. Who are we to say he shouldn't then have the blessing of the Lord and a fruitful ministry? Will we judge another's servant?

Greg.

Anyone who knows the truth about this, and especially a pastor, who commits adultery, has an affair, then divorces their spouse, knowing full well all along what they are doing, but waits til after they marry the one they have committed adultery with to "repent", I have serious doubts about their "repentance". They have had plenty of time, and God will make sure they have plenty of guilt about it before they do it, so they are without excuse. Then, after all the pain the first spouse has suffered, God is going to just give them the green light, and they can go merrily on their way, while the wronged party is devastated, maybe for life? I hardly think so. Part of repentance is turning from the sin, not cementing it by marrying and being in a constant state of adultery. I fail to see how this could be a marriage in God's eyes. But people will find a way to justify anything if they want to do it.

Good point Kat

kat8585 · March 15, 2008

Jesus showing that adultery is committed during an ACT does not make any claims of any ONGOING issue in this new marriage.

I'm assuming people do have sex in the new marriage. If they are not married in God's eyes, they are committing a sin.

kat8585 · March 15, 2008

Well, if the new marriage is something they have to repent of, that says something. Or is it they have to repent of the marriage and one sex act and then after that it's fine and dandy? Again, part of repentance is turning from the sin.

What about Mt. 19.9 and Mark 10.11?