divorce and remarriage

[Sin Eater]

Originally Posted by deb

Hi,
I am married and have been for 8 years now (hopefully will be for many years to come) and come from a background where my parents and grandparents stayed married. I have always just assumed that the Bible tells us that whilst divorce is allowed in certain circumstances, re-marriage is not. Having this opinion in todays world doesn't make me popular (particularly as my husband's parents divorced about 20 years ago and his mum has re-married). Am I wrong to think this? What does the Bible have to say on these issues?
Deb

I wish you and your husband and children a long and happy life.
God loves you and no matter what way people try to Tell You What they Belive the bible says its in your heart that you find the answer.

[Sin Eater]

Originally Posted by jamesglewisf

Noseypoo's article is a good one. It clearly states the Bible's three permissable reasons for divorce.

I'd probably depart from them on the remarriage part. If your divorce was biblical (one of the three reasons stated), then you are free to remarry. If you did not divorce for Biblical reasons, Jesus and Paul made it pretty clear that to remarry is adultery.

OK. Here's the deal. I have heard a lot of people give the argument about the divorce happening before you came to faith argument. I've probably even repeated it. Let me explain why I've changed my mind about it.

If I come to faith today, all my past, present, and future sins are forgiven. The fact that my future sins are forgiven does not give me license to go on sinning. Romans 6 is very clear on this:

Matthew 5:31, 32; Matthew 19:9; and Romans 7:3 make it clear that to divorce for unbiblical reasons is a sin. They also make it clear that to remarry after an unbibilical divorce is to commit adultery whether you wanted the divorce or not. The unbiblical divorce is a sin. If you don't remarry, then you don't compound your sin with another one. If you do remarry, you are sinning again.

The end of Matthew 5:32 makes it clear that if you marry a person who had an unbiblical divorce, then you are committing adultery yourself.

So, when I come to faith doesn't matter. All my past, present, and future sins are forgiven. It doesn't matter the order. It doesn't matter if I divorced, accepted Christ, and then remarried; or if I divorced, remarried, and then accepted Christ. I'm forgiven for both of those sins, but I can never use my forgiveness as a reason to sin again. Your slate was wiped clean; you are a new creation; but that doesn't change the fact that remarriage after an unbiblical divorce is a sin. You were forgiven for the unbilical divorce, but it still happened. Your forgivenss for the divorce doesn't change the rule about remarrying after divorce.

So what's the answer if you already are remarried after an unbiblical divorce? If Christ is your savior, that sin has been forgiven. Confess your sin to God and live in peace knowing that you are forgiven. Don't add a third sin by divorcing your spouse to undo the unbiblical remarriage.

Just to be clear -- remarrying after an unbiblical divorce is a sin. It doesn't make you Jack the Ripper. It makes you a sinner. You don't need to walk around with a scarlet letter on your chest.

One last thing. I don't go around telling people they sinned by remarriage. I don't condemn them. I don't even bring it up. If they ask me a question, then I'll give a biblical answer and point them to what Scripture says. I'll also point them to the Scripture about all of their sins being forgiven.

Sin Eater1/1/1
Shame on him that uses the bible to hurt.
When it runs over with love.

[Sin Eater]

Originally Posted by sonya1530

Sorry about that, it's hard for me to put together a good block of time. Midnight seems to be good :-)

I disagree that I am working hard to make the text fit my belief. It may look that way, b/k the verse has been so perverted. It is as simple as the fact that God's Word will not truly contradict itself. I think that you can very easily know what God commands concerning divorce and remarriage by doing what you suggest by going with the plain reading of the text, the simplest interpretation, not the most complex one. We are given those interpretations in Mark 10, Luk 16:18, Rom 7, I Cor. 7:39, to name a few. The study of hermeneutics tells us that if there are clear verses and unclear verses, to always start with the clear, b/k they cannot disagree. So the unclear must line up with the clear. It cannot be both ways. So to say that a few verses make divorce and remarriage ok when there are multiple verses that clearly say it is not is actually a reversed way of coming up with an answer.

When Jesus came to earth, he brought us to a higher level (example Sermon on the Mount Mt. 5, 6 & 7)("you have heard it said, BUT I say...").
Instead of don't murder, the higher level is not to even be angry, instead of don't commit adultery, now don't even look at a woman in lust or that will be considered aldultery. Instead of an eye for an eye, resist evil and turn the other cheek. Instead of love your neighbor and hate your enemy, love your neighbor and bless, do good to, and pray for those who hate, use and persecute you.
We are called to perfection. We are called to love. Divorce is an exact contradiction to the commandments of Jesus. And if Jesus had meant that adultery or any sexual sin is grounds for divorce, then adultery must be stronger than the effect of the blood sacrafice of Christ, because Jesus said that earthly marriage is the example of God's love for the church. How does the allowance of divorce by Jesus mirror his love for the church? It doesn't line up. That being true would be a hideous reflection of His righteous covenant intention to us.

We have been deceived. The Bible warns us of this especially in the last days. We don't comprehend the goal of Satan to kill steal and destroy. We expect it will be so obvious, when actually he's as sly as a fox. We need to realize that of course he would attack the very example of Christs love to us. He is ruining families and then making it look like God ok'd the reason why. And we spread this lie and support eachother to do so. HE IS A LIAR.

There is another great example of how we are being deceived, but this post is probably way too long as it is. I'll go into that soon.
Please remember that the crowd is not normally right. I completely understand that what I have written is not majority thinking, but please study it and ask the Holy Spirit to show you what the truth is. Don't just take my word for it, and don't take anyone elses. You must know for yourself.

The divorce of my sister, and then two of my closest friends compelled me to do this study. In one of their situations I was a cheerleader concerning her getting away from her husband. But each time a 'cheer' would come out of my mouth I would feel sick about it. With gritted teeth I started to study. I studied all sides of the debate. You can easily find material supporting the belief that divorce and remarriage is acceptable so I will not include them, but I will include a few of the resources I found that agree that it is not.

http://www.marriagedivorce.com/

http://www.bibleandmarriage.com/

http://poovy.8m.com/remarriage.html


I hope that you can hear my heart concerning this matter. I am coming at you humbly as a sister in Christ and I appreciate your responses.

(quote)1/1/1 Sin Eater. So much love yet you do not seek it for yourself and others.

[Sin Eater]

Have you not looked for love in the bible. You only find something to hurt people with.God LOVES ALL.

[Sin Eater]

Hi
I am trying to bring a littel sunshine into peoples lives.It looks as I have arrived just in time.Why do people use the bible as a tool to hurt when it runs over with love?. Me thinks I have arrived just in time.

[Sin Eater]

Originally Posted by Sin Eater

(quote)1/1/1 Sin Eater. So much love yet you do not seek it for yourself and others.

[Sin Eater]

Every day can be like christmas if you whant it to be.Christmas brings out the very best in people.

[Sin Eater]

Hi
are you all bible bashers? You seem to be as all you do is try to hurt one and other.

[Grimey]

This is a forum where people ask questions about the Bible. If you don't want to hear what the Bible has to say, you shouldn't ask.

You need to stop posting sunshine messages everywhere. They aren't interesting and don't add to the discussion. Stay on topic.

[Sin Eater]

Originally Posted by Grimey

This is a forum where people ask questions about the Bible. If you don't want to hear what the Bible has to say, you shouldn't ask.

You need to stop posting sunshine messages everywhere. They aren't interesting and don't add to the discussion. Stay on topic.

Such anger I wonder what part of the bible you found that remark in to hurt.
So you are afraid of the sunshine also.Come over to the light and leave your anger behind.This is just a fun reply please dont be angery.I am just trying to get people to see the love that is in the bible and not to offend anyone.If we all did this we may start to bring a little happiness into each others lives.Go on give it a try.Use the bible as a tool to bring happiness and forgivness.

[jamesglewisf]

You are supposed to speak the truth in love. You don't call what is evil good and what is good evil. The Bible is also there to bring conviction of sin. The purpose of the Bible is not to bring happiness. Happiness is a response to your circumstances. If everything is going great, then you are happy. If everything is not going great, then you are not. The point of the Bible is to bring peace and joy. There's a difference. You can have peace and joy even if your circumstances are awful. You have peace and joy because you trust in the promises of God. Those promises include conviction of sin, rebuke, reproof, justice, punishment, and forgiveness.

It is not admirable, logical, or even righteous to spend all of your time focusing on love and forgiveness in the Bible. You have to take the whole thing.

2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

You also have to remember that it is our job to teach each other what the Bible says and to turn others from sin.

James 5:19-20
19 My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth, and one turns him back, 20 let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins.

When you just go around posting meaningless blurbs about feeling happy when the rest of us are having a serious discussion about important topics, it is very annoying.

Proverbs 15:2
2 The tongue of the wise commends knowledge,
but the mouth of the fool gushes folly.

Proverbs 15:14
14 The discerning heart seeks knowledge,
but the mouth of a fool feeds on folly.

Proverbs 25:20
20 Like one who takes away a garment on a cold day,
or like vinegar poured on soda,
is one who sings songs to a heavy heart.

[FoC]

Evidences of divorce and remarriage in the Church

Assertions/Conclusions of this article:

This article is to show evidence that there were remarried divorcess in the early church who were in fellowship, neither being cast out, nor condemned by the brethren. There were restrictions placed on these individuals, but they were in the church.

Supporting evidence:

1.1)

Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man,
(1Ti 5:9)

"Having been the wife of one man"

This requirement clearly is not speaking of a woman who had a man-harem.
There is no real issue of women marrying multiple husbands given in the bible nor in historical accounts.
This leaves either the remarried widow, or the remarried divorcee.
It cannot be a remarried widow as no law prohibited the widow from remarrying. Paul even tells widows;

"I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
(1Co 7:8-9 KJV)

Paul would be setting these widows up to be rejected from this list later if she did remarry.
Also, Paul even insists that younger widows REmarry here...

But the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry; Having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith. And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.
I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.
(1Ti 5:11-14 KJV)

He absolutely would be condemning this woman in later years to be rejected the churches help by forcing her to remarry now.
We know Paul was not so callous and uncaring by his instruction for the helping of widows he gave.

The only possibility for this "wife of one man" is that she was divorced and remarried.
That is the only possibility from scripture as it is the only thing that is clearly corrected in Gods word.

and yet this woman is still in fellowship...not being cast out of the assembly such as the man who had his fathers wife and WAS living in fornication.

Her life was not exemplary, so she couldnt be added to the list of widows, but she WAS in the church and in fellowship.

The requisite for her to have been the wife of ONE man CLEARLY indicates that she COULD have been the wife of more than one husband in her lifetime....aka a remarried divorcee...yet not condemned to hell or cast out of fellowship.

1.2)

Titus 1:6 if anyone is blameless, husband of one wife, having believing children, not accused of loose behavior, or disobedient.

Husband of one wife

We see here that these are requirements of those in higher positions in the church..folks who are to set the EXAMPLE for the rest to follow.
We will discuss the possible meanings here of ''husband of one wife''


It cannot refer to those who are widowed. as the remarried widow(er) was not prohibited or restricted in any manner I have seen, Paul even recommends that younger widows remarry. Paul would be purposefully making it impossible for a woman to later to be accepted to this list of widows for no good reason if he were speaking the remarried widow in 1 tim 5:9 above instead of a remarried divorcee.

To provide evidence from GODS word, lets see this..

"one ruling his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence;
for if one does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God? "
(1Ti 3:4-5 EMTV)

This clearly shows that this man must be one who can maintain his own household, even the obedience of his children. A man whos been divorced and remarried MAY not be the best person for this job.

Paul would also be causing these men to be unable to qualify for positions in the church by telling them that if they burn that they should remarry.

“I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
(1Co 7:8-9 KJV)

No widow(er) is forbidden to remarry and it would be an absurdity to now punish these who do (when they follow Pauls own instruction) by unjustly restricting them for doing nothing against Gods law/instruction.

It is very unlikely that it ONLY speaks to polygamists as there is nothing in the NT that clearly condemns the act and Ive not found that the practice was as rampant as some try to assert...I suggest you do your own study to see if Im right or wrong.

We must see in scripture what meaning to put to this phrase 'husband of one wife'

Of all the possibilities, ONLY divorce and remarriage is corrected clearly in scripture. We can assume that frivolous divorce and remarriage would immediately bar one from the prominent position of bishop.
But Paul makes no distinction, so we must assume that he also means those who divorced an adulteress then remarried as well (just to be on the safe side). Showing that these, although not the most prominent persons, were indeed still in fellowship with the rest of our brethren.

Some will state that this have put away these second marriages, but what I find very peculiar is that, if this matter were so crucial to salvation, Paul should surely have made a point of it. "Only if these second wives have been put away''. The way its left, it sounds very much like they could have still been with the person.

Another issue is that those of the anti-remarriage camp state that this second "marriage" is not a marriage at all, but an adulterous affair.
The clear implication above is that the second marriage is a recognized one, if it weren't, then Paul would have simply called these people adulterers and surely they wouldnt even be in fellowship. Let alone being considered for the position of Bishop.

It is also notable that Paul nowhere states that these second marriages were invalid, nor does he state that these people were to have left this second spouse. In fact, in 1 cor 7 Paul tells these frivolously parted from their spouse to ''remain UNmarried or reconcile........"...showing that REmarriage is quite possible indeed even if wrong to do.

[FoC]

well, I tried to edit that last one...
"written by WmTipton (FoC)"

It might be a little easier to read on the website.
http://www.assembly-ministries.com/page3.html

[Justawoman]

So you are a Tipton? That is my mother's maiden name. Interesting. Nice post by the way.

[Dude111]

Nice addition my friend!!

Welcome to frappydoo