I agree.



Then kindly restrict yourself to you own threads and don't try to censor what other adults may be discussing or arguing.

For the record, iam went after me accusing me of trying to "convert" her, manufacturing that argument out of whole cloth.

I, for one, will not let you or anyone else "dictate" what I can and cannot write about, especially on a thread that is not "yours." I would be more than willing to NOT post on one of your threads if that was your wish.

But I DO reserve the right to RESPOND to anyone, especially someone who goes out of their way to attack me.

Hello Ladies and Gents:

Just a friendly reminder to keep this discussion respectful.

The Harleys thank you.

No comment beyond, I hear you, we'll see about others.

ForeverHers thanks you.

I hope I don't interfere with this original post, but I think my problem follows down a similar path and might get a response on this post.

I'm looking at being divorced by a religious person. I'm concerned that my spouse has come up with their own terms that this may be OK with GOD. The problems we have are complex, but do not have to do with adultery. I do not think my spouse has talked with the pastor.

How should I bring up this concern with my spouse without appearing that I'm throwing it in their face? A support person of mine said that if this is importtant to me in my heart then I had best tackle this myself with my spouse.

Thanks

You just can't stop yourself can you?

BTW, priests can be called pastors.

I made it abundantly clear that I was relaying information from a catholic perspective (the only one I know). The OP was free to dismiss it completely or ask me for further clarification. You are being disingenuious when you claim I made "anything less than annullment substandard'. Can you show me where I wrote that? I'm waiting....

I have no desire to argue with you or even talk with you.

I really don't have any advice on how to broach or approach the subject with your spouse.

But I do hear you about how some seem to "speak for God" in order to justify their choices.

My former wife, who I believed to be a born again believer chose to have an affair and later justified it by saying that we should have never married, God wanted her to be happy, etc.

So when I read folks making similar arguments, saying everything from not getting romantic gestures from a spouse is emotional abuse or emotional infidelity, to saying that their marriage was a mistake, etc, most of it looks indistinguishable from the fog babble I've seen here, not to mention personally witnessed.

The word that some are translating to mean marital unfaithfulness is PORNEA, the word from which we get our word pornography.

Clearly, Jesus is not talking about just any marital unfaithfulness, but sexual misbehavior. So I don't think anyone looking at the original language would say that pornea includes anything other than sexual misbehavior.

Many try to widen the scripture to say that abuse is grounds for divorce, or addiction, or marrying the wrong person, or whatever they want to fill in.

You can search for a denomination that matches what you want scripture to read, or you can look at what Jesus clearly says, that it is NOT God's plan for folks to divorce.

So instead of looking for validation to divorce, why not try to do what God calls for us to do.

I write this as one who was ultimately divorced, and I was emotionally as well as physically faithful, no beating nor cheating on my part.

I get to be a every other weekend dad because someone decided that she knew better than God about what He meant when he said He hates divorce, or He hates the putting away of a spouse, or however you want to translate that.

I believe divorce is forgivable, and I think an 'innocent spouse' one who didn't seek divorce, but was divorced against his/her will is free to remarry if the other spouse sinned against God and the family by choosing to divorce for any reason other than sexual misconduct.

It's a hard teaching for some, as many know they didn't have Biblical grounds to choose divorce. Yet the truth is God didn't intend for folks to divorce, but to come close one to another by working through their differences, not separating and divorcing because they were different, or flawed, or how ever you see your spouse or former spouse.

ditto.

Then why did you start it?

Nevermind, I think I already know the answer to that question.

I'll say what I choose to say and the Mods will decide if it needs editing. What makes you think you have that job?

Hi Enlightened !

Thank you for this post -- I think it was well said. I do have two follow up Biblical questions: Have you forgiven your spouse? If she at some point desired to get back together with you, would you feel a responsibility to pursue reconciliation?

I know those a very personal questions and I would understand if you do not want to answer. I ask them because of some conversations with Christian divorced folks and they would refuse reconcilation. It is just another dimension of this topic that is interesting as well as difficult from a Christian perspective.

Thanks!
MMM

Ya, I think we've all heard that sort of "justification" for willfully disobeying God...."God didn't REALLY mean what He said," beginning with Eve and continuing today.



It IS Fog Babble, wrapped up and codified in "irreconcilable differences." Translation = for any reason you can come up with, just like the Jews of Jesus' day had.



Here's a little discussion of "pornea" that might be worthy of a little exploration.



"This is a hotly debated verse for two reasons: 1. it is the only place Jesus allows for remarriage in all the gospels and 2. the word translated immorality is literally "pornea" which is either fornication before marriage or any type of sexual immorality during marriage including adultery. "Mochea" means adultery and it would have settled the issue quick but our Lord used a word which the writers translated into pornea and the debate continues."




There are those who also believe that NO divorced spouse should remarry as long as the divorced spouse is still alive.

But I think you touched on the salient point in your first sentence in this quotation. It's all about "Forgiveness" and what sins CAN be forgiven and what sins cannot be forgiven. It is about the efficacy of Christ's sacrifice for sins of all types. Hence the clear teaching, "...and such were some of you."

Food for thought.

I'm sure that Enlightened will give you his response, but here's MY thoughts on your general question.

We are REQUIRED to forgive a repentant sinner.

We are NOT required to continue living with them or having a relationship with them.

The "choice" was given to the Faithful Spouse by Jesus while explaining the intent of God for marriage as it was from the beginning.

I have offered forgiveness. I personally do not believe forgiveness can be unilaterally given. I.E. Christ offers forgiveness, but forgiveness is not complete until the offer is accepted.

So I am willing to forgive, but believe the model set out in scripture is that the party who has sinned against and/or injured the other must seek forgiveness.

One cannot give forgiveness to another who will not accept it. So all I can do is offer. As long as the offer is refused, I've done all I can do.

On your second question, I'd think my wife would be upset if I reconciled romantically with my ex-wife.

From the research I did, I don't believe we can divorce for our own reasons. However, I do believe the innocent spouse is not bound if the unfaithful spouse seeks and is granted a divorce.

We are told not to hold the unbeliever against her will and we are told that if one will not leave their sin we are to treat them as an unbeliever.

We are told not to divorce the unbeliever, so it's pretty clear that Christians are to rarely if ever choose divorce. But if the one who is an actual unbeliever, or is to be treated as an unbeliever based on Matthew 18 wants out, we are to let them out.

I think we are no longer bound as one, as we are in obedience to let them out if THEY choose to divorce.

Being divorce is not necessarily a sin. However, in most cases, the one choosing to divorce is choosing to sin.

The keyword here is REPENTANT. God offers forgiveness, but it's only offered to those willing to repent.

I believe we are to be WILLING to forgive anyone willing to repent. However, I do not believe we are to just pronounce forgiveness upon folks.

I don't believe there is any case where forgiveness is a unilateral action in scripture. God sent prophets to have the people confess their sins, turn from their ways and He promised to forgive.

Forgiveness appears to ALWAYS be conditional on repentance.

I tell my kids, I don't want to hear they are sorry, over and over again. Instead, I want to experience their sorry in how they live, by NOT doing what they know to be wrong, over and over again.

That's repentance, turning from the sin. Not just saying sorry I got caught.

I think most folks fall into the sorry I got caught school, and then return to doing the same things over and over again.

Is that real remorse, real repentance?

I don't know.

I do know that it's not my place to judge. I think that is why Jesus said in Matthew 18:22 his words on 70 times 7 with regards to forgiveness.

Only He can judge if remorse and repentance is real. It is not our place to judge.

I do believe we can choose not to put ourselves in a place where we are hurt 70 times 7 times. We can seek shelter until they are able to provide emotional, spiritual or physical safety.

But we are to be willing to forgive. I really believe that is what God calls us to do. To be willing to forgive when that person seeks forgiveness.

Enlightened - I agree with your thoughts on the issue of forgiveness.

But let me also "warn" you that this subject has come up many times over the years and there are a lot of people who ascribe to the idea that "forgiveness is the gift you give yourself."

I have 'argued' in the past that there are different types of "forgiveness," similar to there are different types of "love."

The limitation of the English language is that such words often need "modifiers" in order to more clearly establish what "sort" of "forgiveness" or "love" is being spoken about.

I would posit that your "willingness to forgive" example is just that, "one form of forgiveness." It is, in effect, the "turning over of the forgiveness of sin" to God, where it rightly belongs. It entails "releasing" the "vengeance," the "hatred," the need to exact some sort of punishment by yourself.

In THAT sense, that "type" of forgiveness is being obedient to God in that "vengeance is mine, saith the Lord." If it is the Lord's will, even the biggest sinner can come to know Christ, at which point they would seek your forgiveness due to the conviction of their heart. THAT would be when it would be, in my humble opinion, appropriate to "forgive the sinner himself/herself the sin against you" as an act of obedience on your part TO God.

As Christ said, if someone sins against you and comes to you and repents of that sin, you are to forgive them. It would seem that here, again, a "modifier" would be helpful as to just what "repents" means to someone who is using that term and what it meanst to God, as described in the Scripture. "I'm sorry," for example, can be said to be a 'type' of repentance, but is it sorrow for having been caught, sorrow for pain inflicted, or is it truly an acknowledgment to God of their sin and a turning away from that sin? I personally believe that when Jesus referenced the 70 times 7 times He was acknowledging the pervasive pull of sin and the "problem" the once one "crosses over the line" they have a "weakness" that the same sin can exploit. The bottom line is that God "provides a way out," but the underlying assumption is that the person needs to in a relationship WITH God and walking TOWARD God in order for God's "provision" to be "seen" by them, let alone accepted by them DESPITE the "pull in the other direction" that would have the person walk AWAY from God.

Good points, Enlightened!