Meaning if they agree with you they must be right otherwise they are wrong.


Well except in your first expositions here you said most of it was taken from sermons and research....

It is my take on your position. I believe it is your contention that hers is not an affair marriage...since hers sin was wiped clean by the Lord. In fact, having read your position regarding the contract of marriage... in your eyes an affair marriage could not possibly exist given the nature of the laws governing our land(now, obviously people that marry more than one would be an exception to this)... since in order for someone else to legally remarry, they would need a divorce.

MEDC - so are you saying that God CANNOT and WILL not forgive ALL sins of a believer who accepts Jesus Christ?

If you start out as a liar, a thief, a murder, an adulterer, etc., is it your contention that "some sins" are not forgiven and the slate "wiped clean" in God's eyes for someone who accepts Christ?

And while we are at it, where does the Scripture define an "affair marriage," let alone define it as some special subset of a marriage that caused the participants in the marriage to commit adultery, that is "unforgivable and cannot" be covered by the blood of Christ as a "one flesh" union?

FH.... you KNOW the position I and many others take... that while God forgives all sin...he requires a person to turn from that sin... he doesn't just make the fact that it is sin disappear. MaryM wasn't told that she could continue doing what she was doing... that her actions were no longer sin because she was forgiven... no, she was told to sin no more.

And FH... contrary to the manner in which you like to speak.... some of us here can actually hold a conversation without quoting Scripture. Your interpretation of Scripture and the way that you look at Christianity is wrong in my impression.

FH...you remind me of someone that wants to be a musician... they know how to play the chords...they know the words to the song... but rhythm is absent in their efforts. IMHO, your spiritual life has no flow and no rhythm. That is why, IMO, you cannot find a church to have fellowship with others believers.... you are truly a band of one.

and yes, God can and does forgive sin...duh. what God does not do is turn a sinful act into a blessed act. He does not bend the rules in order to allow another believer into his fold. HE requires that we repent and turn from the sin that he has forgiven. That is the last time I will answer that question for you FH...I am tired of the games you play on this topic.

And hypocritical.

It would take the grace of God to make the union holy, because without some serious hard work, introspection, willingness to dwelve into the pain the AP's caused at the expense of someone they vowed to never harm...the consequences of guilt (even and expecially at the sub-conscious level) would destroy the AP's from within, and the marriage itself.

I call it the grace of God, while others may call it a personal revelation...but I would say it is uncommon and unlikely without, that the union could ever be a holy union. By holy union I mean one which increases and extends something positive (God's love) between the two and outward to the community.

I do not normally agree with either FH or MM about biblical translation, however my faith is based on forgiveness so I struggle very hard with this. I see great harm continuing when AP's marry, both to themselves and to all that they effect.

And then there is that nasty hypocrite factor.

I don't think they should forever pay for their HUGE mistake though. Nor do I think they should divorce if they can come to terms with what they have done...through whatever means they can (go and sin no more...go and harm no more, etc).

I take pity on AP's who marry, as I see no good coming from it or to them. I almost married my AP and the five years we were together were the darkest, most unholy years of my life. I thank God that that unholy union is severed.

I do not wish the same on anyone else.

I think we all agree that the very concept of AP's leaving their spouse to marry another because of an affair is disgusting, hypocritical, unethical and immoral.

But what is done is done. It would be unethical and hypocritical to not help those who need help, or to say that someone can never make right his past mistakes. If that is so, we are all doomed to repeat our own history...and that is against most of our beliefs (I hope).

Weaver makes some great points!

Actually, He does, MEDC. No He doesnt bend the rules. But here's the rub...

The rules state that all of us should be consigned to He!!. That is the rules. Now, the fact that God gives believers grace...does that mean God is bending or breaking the rules? Of course not.

You see the rules state that someone must die for our sins. The payment is blood. For most people, they will pay for their own sins with their own blood. But for believers, Someone else paid the price.

So, the rules were kept. Justice was done.

Throughout the Bible, God has used unclean and unholy things for His purposes. Scripture is littered with such things.

I think I very much believe what Weaver just wrote. I think marriages starts as JJ's, are sad and will probably always be riddled with issues (consequences).

I have shown where I believe the covenant (contract) is ended. It is ended by the person who has the right and power to end it. And that is given to the BS. No spouse, unless their spouse is an unbeliever and has left them or their spouse has committed adultery, has the right to divorce. And any subsequent sex after that is adultery! And they should immediately divorce and come back to their legitimate marriage.

The issue I speak to is when the BS legitimately ends the marriage. Which is their right.

Scripture says that we are married to our spouse as long as we both shall live. So, then why does it say to let the unbeliever go and that a spouse is no longer under bondage (the covenant is broken) if it says in this other passage that we are married as long as we both shall love?

Maybe it is just like in Genesis, when God said they would surely die if they ate the fruit. And of course, they didnt die instantly...physically. They died spiritually. Spiritual death is just as valid as physical death. That is why Scripture says that the believer can let the unbeliever go. It is because the believer is married to a dead man or woman. And Scripture says that if this dead person departs, then you are no longer under bondage.

A person in adultery that is a believer, is spiritually dead (meaning they are absent the fellowship of God). Scripture also outlines (as I have shown) a process where ALL believers are to take their grievances of ALL fellow believers. And at the end of that process, should the wayward believer not repent, then they are declared spiritually dead, and that the other party is no longer bound by the contract.

This is what I talk about when I am writing about looking at Scripture in its total context. If I just took the line where it says that I am bound to my wife as long as we both shall live, then my understanding would be that there is NO such thing as divorce. But Scripture isnt saying that. We cannot just read one or two lines and fully understand what is going on here.

Do I think there is such things as illegitimate marriages? Sure, as I outlined above.

Let's take David for a sec. If Uriah had not been killed, then there is no way David could have ever married Bathsheeba. That is unless Uriah died physically or Uriah went thru the divorce process and ended the covenant.

Either way, David marrying Bathsheeba is not an illegitimate marriage. Their marriage was actually blessed by God. But it was also cursed by the consequences of their actions. They had children die because of what David did. A VERY, VERY high price was paid (which is what I think Weaver was eluding to). But the price was paid, David repented and his marriage was blessed by God.

I understand what you have all been saying. But there are things that end marriages. Actually only one thing...death. And that death can take on the form of either physical death or spiritual death.

And Scripture is very clear that once a spouse is declared dead (spiritually or physically), then the living spouse is free to remarry.

That has been my position here.

NO... it wasn't. The price was NEVER paid. The laws handed down by God stipulated that the price was to be DAVID dying... not his child...where in the Bible does it say that there could be a "stand in" for the punishment??? The price....clearly defined in Scripture... was never paid by David.

Jesus was a stand in for my punishment!

I'm sorry MM... you are manipulating.... where does it say there could be a stand in for his crime. Jesus has not set foot on the Earth as of that time. The New Covenant did not exist.... this happened under old testiment law... so... where is the Scriptural support for David's consequences?

A stand in for THE punishment MM means the punishment due David.

Here you go, MEDC...

They had sheep stand in for their transgressions, if you remember!!

So, Scripture did not DICTATE that David should have died for his crime MM? Is that what you are saying? That any punishment could be avoided by using a stand in???

Be clear MM... speak with your own understanding here. Was the law that David should die for his crime??? Yes or no??? Was that law handed down by God??? Yes or no??

If the Bible were full of men like David MM, I think Chritianity would be viewed by many as being similar in nature to the most perversely extreme "religions" out there.

David was a barbarian and a hypocrite by any standard.

No. Not the way you are putting it! The law states that we do die when we sin. Immediately!! Now, that is a spiritual death. But then Scripture goes on to say:


David confessed...and God forgave. I dont need MY words. God's words are very clear here. David was forgiven, although consequences did come because of what he did. Here is the list of consequences:


David paid a VERY high price indeed for his transgressions. But, he was immediately forgiven by God when he repented.

Scripture is very clear on this.

God called David the man after His own heart. It seems God and you have differing opinions of David!

And yes, David was a hypocrite. We all are...including you MEDC!

When we start trying to rank people by their sins, then we are on a slippery slope. Jeffrey Dahmer was no worse or better than you or I when/if he came to know the Lord. Sure, punishment and consequences in this life remained for his sins. But upon death, if he was indeed saved, then he was dealt with the same way you or I will be dealt with when we reach Heaven.

The ground is level at the foot of the Cross.

So, I guess Leviticus 20:10 holds no meaning to you... since this is exactly what David did and the punishment is clearly spelled out. It doesn't get any clearer than that MM.