OK ForeverHers. Here I am. Let's go at it shall we.

(LOL) I am clarifying my thoughtis in this area here.

Regarding that Scripture - I do indeed believe that Man's will is stronger than God. If someone does not want to remain in Jesus's hand then they can jump out.

God gave us a free will. He will not violate our free will. God will let us go to ****** rather than violate our free will.

I guess regarding a affair. I don't believe that God sanctions an affair marriage. I do not believe he considers it to be a marriage. If an adulteror in an affair repents, that would necessarily mean divorcing IMO. Otherwise where is the turning from sin? Anything else seems like a get out of jail free card to me. If 2 people can legitimise an affair by marrying where are we.

I guess I would also like to say that I find this discussion very interesting and I am not closed minded about it and am very interested in CHRISTIAN views.

Also to clarify, we are not talking here about the situation regarding unbelievers - I think we are both in agreement. This is for people who are Christians having affairs and re-marrying.

bigK - since you're open minded, let me know when you want the secular view based on the Golden Rule. It's real easy to cut to the chase w/o a bunch of "interpretations". <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

WAT

weeelll.. from a strictly biblical traditional view...

If two people get divorced due to biblical grounds, ie "adultery", one might say, "The marriage has actually ended in God's eyes,and thus the two people are then released from their prior covenant with each other, and thus can get remarried cleanly.

However... from a strictly traditional biblical point of view.. the guilty party is supposed to be STONED TO DEATH. SO.... I dont think God actually intended for them to be clear to marry again. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

If the betrayed party has married again, (or is dead) then in some cases, the WS then has been released "cleanly", and is somewhat clear to marry again.

And sometimes... God works with what he has.

King David murdered Bathsheba's husband, and married her, after adultery with her. God chose to bless their offspring from the marriage. So... yes, David should not have done it. But God is Good.

WAT - how about we agree to "save" that discussion for another thread as BK has outlined what he wants his thread to focus on?

So, the only comment for now about your contention that on the secular side, "It's real easy to cut to the chase w/o a bunch of "interpretations"," would be that even the "Golden Rule" you would elevate to THE "standard" of behavior is entirely subject to the interpretation of any individual simply because each individual in the secular world "bows" to no one but themselves as "sovereign" of their own life and what they want, or don't want, to embrace as their own set of standards. Thus, there are far more potential "interpretations" in the Secular world than there are in the Christian world simply because God Himself in unchanging, as are HIS "rules."

Welcome to the discussion, Techie!

Let me ask you to clarify this thought a little. According to the Scripture ONLY the Faithful Spouse, not the Unfaithful spouse is free to remarry following a divorce without then entering into a state of adultery themselves.

It is the one exception to divorce for two Christians. Why would that be? Because the marriage itself, all marriage, is real and "until death do us part" in God's eyes. But He "makes an exception" for the faithful spouse with respect to the sin of adultery. They do not have to "pay the price," if you will, of their spouse's infidelity. That "price" remains with the unfaithful spouse. If that was the end of the discussion, then we would be back to your next comment, because in OT times there was no need for divorce based upon adultery. The penalty was death and death ended the marriage, to say nothing of ending the Unfaithful spouse's chance of entering into another marriage with the affair partner or with anyone else.

Adultery was, and still is, that serious in God's eyes. But we now live the age of Grace, not the age of Law, and forgiveness has entered the picture through Christ. We are left with human emotions of the betrayal, but without the "remedy" of exacting revenge and terminating the marriage by death. That, I believe, is one of the reasons Jesus gave us the story of the Unmerciful Servant.



I would disagree with your assessment here. You are referring to Old Testament Law for God's people, the Jews. Jesus fulfilled ALL the Law and ended the "Age of Law." He instituted the "Age of Grace" and PAID the full penalty Himself for all sins of those who accept Him as their Lord and Savior.

But you are right in that God never intended for marriage to be anything other than "for life." It is we humans who have twisted and amended God's purpose for marriage into one of "self-gratification" for the married couple rather than as one that brings honor and glory to God according to His design for marriage.




The Faithful spouse remarrying after divorcing due to adultery on the part of their first spouse does NOT "free" the Unfaithful spouse to be released "cleanly." They are enjoined to NOT marry again, because that would be continuing to commit adultery AND bringing the other person (former affair partner or not) into a state of adultery too.

In the event that the Faithful spouse died, then the marriage ends and the Unfaithful spouse would be free to marry again. But the "caution" would be that they should only enter another marriage with another believer and after they have repented to God of their previous sin.

God bless.

Okay, I'll come back to this thought a little later, but for now let ask you another "clarifying" question if I may.

Satan and the fallen angels are stronger than Man, right?
God has made NO provision for saving and/or restoring them to fellowship with Him, but has prepared He11 for them as their eternal abode, right?

God made provision for the salvation of Man, from the beginnning of time, right? That salvation is vested in, and through the Word, the Son of God, right?

So here is the question that causes much debate and difference of opinion within those who call themselves "Christians".... Is salvation by works or by the grace of God?

Back with more later. But for now I have to attend to some chores around home.

God bless.

I would hardly call D&B's marriage "blessed". The family was, to say the least, a bit dysfunctional.

David reaped what he had sown...pain and betryal.

i said he blessed their offspring, not their marriage <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

This is in contrast to the child of their adultery, which He killed. So, their marriage would seem to be " a step up" from their previous state, in God's eyes, at least.

FH - big K is big enough to decide whether he wants to ask. He doesn't need your help.

WAT

WAT, you are consistant, I'll give you that. YOU intrude into BK's thread AFTER he made it clear that he wanted Christian, not secular, discussion, and you posit that YOU have the "easy answers founded in secular reasoning, and then you try to "chastise me?!?"

What a great example of your own standard of the "Golden Rule."

Enough. Before you intrude your distractions into areas you just don't understand, I'll not respond to you anymore on this thread. I have no doubt that your animosity toward anything "Christian" may tempt you intrude, but I'll leave it up to BK as to whether or not he wishes to dialog with you on this thread.

Actually, the roots of the "Golden Rule" are religious in nature (see linked article). While the ethic of reciprocity can be found in many faiths and cultures, interestingly the version of it that comes closest to what is commonly known as the "Golden Rule" was spoken by none other than Jesus himself as he countered the religious leaders of his day who thought they had God all figured out. Regarding loving one's enemies, Jesus said:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Luke 6:31.

It is, indeed, a worthy creed by which to live one's life. When the entire context of Luke chapter 6 is taken into account, however, I believe it one that is extremely difficult to live up to when left solely to one's own devices.

MAz

Could you please provide the biblical reference for this?

Not arguing, I'd just like to be able to read it. I come from a very strict religious background that taught that all remarriages are adulterous, regardless of who was "at fault" or faithful, unless the spouse is dead. And there was quite a bit of biblical evidence that supported that view. (That I couldn't reproduce here, myself. I'm sure are much smarter biblical scholars around here than me who could.)

Thanks.

AmIok - Sure, I'd be happy to give you the Scriptural references.

Matthew 19:8-9 Jesus replied, [color:"red"]"Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." [/color] (emphasis added)


Mark 10:5-9,11-12 [color:"red"]"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,"[/color] Jesus replied. [color:"red"]But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." [/color]

He answered, [color:"red"]"Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery." [/color]


The prevalent view at the time was that a man could divorce his wife for any reason whatsoever. Jesus made it clear that there is only ONE valid reason (or allowable reason by God) for believers to divorce, and "set the record straight."

If all one used was the Mark passage, it could be construed as NO divorce is allowed by God, but Jesus made it quite clear when speaking to the Pharisees that "marital unfaithfulness" was the only exception that God granted to the Faithful Spouse. I believe that He made that distinction because death was removed as the "way" to end a marriage that had suffered from adultery. God is gracious to the Faithful spouse in granting him/her the right to divorce if it becomes necessary and not have to violate the 7th commandment themselves should they later decide to remarry.

God bless.

I thought I've heard it said by other christians (Motorman, maybe) that divorce was also allowed in cases of abuse and abandonment. Is that not right?

Mys

Thanks, FH.

I have heard that the words for "marital unfaithfullness" in the Matthew 19 verse really went beyond just unfaithfullness, meaning an entirely depraved, ongoing lifestyle. And that the word "divorce" in this verse was only the kid of divorce that "betrothed" couples could get -- basically calling off thier marriage.

Again, I'm not a biblical scholar. I'm repeating concepts that I learned a long time ago, so I may have it very wrong.

I'd love some clarification.

Thanks!
-AmI

I have also seen the definition of marital unfailtfullness extended to include such grounds. I don't think I disagree with that interpretation.

Well I have stated on the other thread that the David and Bathsheeba situation worries me a bit as regards my interpretation of scripture. A few points though.

1. That was the OLD Testament. The NEW testament is where Jesus changes the rules if you like.

2. Solomon, the child of David and Bathsheeba was made king, was the wisest, richest man who ever lived yet he died having lost the kingdom having fallen to the wiles of his unsaved wives. If he was so smart why did he have so many wives (just a joke folks)

3. The child born of the adultery did die. God judged David - his son slept with all his wives openly, Tamar was raped by her brother, David lost the kingdom etc. But upon repentance, David's forgiveness was complete but he still suffered the consequences thereof.

4. Technically, when David killed Uriah, he removed the adultery from his relationship and as Uriah, Bathsheeba's husband was dead, she was free to marry whoever she willed.

Polygamy was the order of the day them. But the bible seems to only talk of David's sin, not Bathsheebas.

Is it possible that a young woman like Bathsheeba, summoned to the King in the night was intimidated? Was this a rape? I don't know. David was a powerful man - in a position of absolute power over her. Just musing folks - not building ANY doctrine here. I am satisfied that (1) above precludes consideration of David and Bathsheeba from my consideration.

OK. I don't believe Satan and his angels are more powerful than a believer - God doesn't overide our free will so satan certainly cannot. The devil most certainly DID NOT make me do it or anyone else for that matter. A Believer can stand against the devil and all his works and is covered by the blood of Jesus who said "I will build my church and the gates of ****** shall not prevail against it" Not that the church is not on the defense, it is an offense against the gates of ******.

Faith - Works. Hmm. Well the Bible clearly states we are saved by grace through faith noty works lest any man should boast. James also makes it clear that we demonstrate our faith by our good works.

Oh and one other thing FH, The state in some countries considers same sex "marriages" to be "marriages" I presume you do not say because they are sanctioned by Government they are santioned by God?