Frog - don't let FH's tone put you off. He has recommended a good book - you could also check out "More than a Carpenter" also by Josh McDowell but less comprehensive than the evidence one or "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel.

BK - you may find my "tone" with Frog objectionable, but give me a break. HE set the "audio level" with his very first post on this thread. The quote above indicated NOT a question, but a "position statement."

Add to that I have been battling a sinus infection/respiratory flu since last Sunday, and I admit that my "patience" level is not as robust as it should be.

But to meet "tone level" yet again, let me address Frog's post in the quotation above.


"It drives me crazy when people quote God. "

Frognomore - must not care much for the Word of God, then.


"You mayb be quoting an apostle, you may be quoting a scripture but you are not quoting God."

Frog - that is your OPINION that you are stating as fact, with NO supporting evidence. Suffice it to say that the Scripture is considered to be the inerrant and inspired Word of God to believers who have as the foundation of their belief Jesus Christ. If Jesus Christ is NOT who He said He is and if Jesus Christ did NOT rise from the dead, then the rest of "it," i.e., the "debate" over the Scripture, is irrelevant.

"There is not one quote in the bible attributed to God."

Frog, how about 12 that I know of off the top of my head that (there are more, but I'm too tired to look them up).

1-10: The Ten Commandments
11: Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin
12: This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.

All twelve of those were directly attributed to God.

You mentioned the Burning Bush, so toss in "Take thy sandals off from thy feet, for the ground you stand upon is holy ground," to make it a "Baker's Dozen."

FH - he was quite wound up in his first post due to a misunderstanding. - I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

I think Frog has serious questions and seems open to a discussion so why would you be so dismissive like that?

Ok then let me go about it this way.

I do have questions and I think my problem is the way I ask.

I did not articulate this well what I meant was actually written by god.

But let me try it like this.

Lets say I am a non believer. Take faith out of the equation. Do not point to faith or that I MUST believe any thing that can not be proven with empiracal evidence.

I am a scientist or an archeologist, or a historian. I need data and I need the source of the data. I also need to know the persons credibility. The credibility factor of course is big. If the alcholic, crackhead on the corner says they saw the chupacabra last night I typically take that with a grain of salt.

If we cannot ascertain who wrote a certain passage or book then I will not discredit it based on that but I will also not credit it to be true either.

This is where I have the problem MYSELF. I am not asking for proof from the Bible which is what you are providing me.

I am asking for proof from outside of the bible. I don't know if that makes sense or not.

Again I am not doubting the credibility of the Bible or of Christianity. What I am saying is I don't know that taking the bible so literally is the best idea either.

Okay Frog, let's try this again. I am not at all sure what your questions have to do with the subject of this thread and they probably belong on a thread of their own. However, the "actually written by God" part of your questions misses the point between inspired, dictated, or directly written by God.

So without getting into all of that, let's just look at the Ten Commandments as one example that "meets" your criteria of actually being written by the hand of God.

Those commandments were written by God and given to Moses. They existed on the stone tablets and were also written in the Old Testament book of Exodus by Moses, who directly received them from God.



Okay, but it appears that you are possibly bringing into your scenario certain presuppostions. But we'll wait and see how your questions continue and come back to this point if needed.




Understandable. We all approach all data, all facts, with certain presuppositions that will affect our interpretation of the data, especially when dealing with matters outside of the realm of scientific inquiry.

So where to you want to begin first?




So how to define "literal?" Your statement of "so litterally" is interesting, but compared to what? If, for example, you are saying that the Scripture is not to be believed in it's entirety, then the next logical question would be, "what parts are to be rejected and what parts are to accepted and followed, and who determines what is rejected and what is accepted?"

Frog, the book I recommended to you addresses MANY, if not all, of these sorts of questions. I would highly recommend you get the book and read it if your inquiries are sincere.

Thank you to everyone who responded to my "confusion", Noodle, Mrs.W, Mark, MM, 2long, FH. I am still confused, but I'll keep plugging away. It's hard to lose a life long belief that has brought such joy, comfort and meaning, especially when a new one doesn't replace it. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

But I need to put it aside for now as I am beginning to feel like a thief at work, being paid to be on MB... time to give my company the time I'm being paid for.

Personally, I think FNM is asking very appropriate and thoughtful questions.
And his point about miracles not being subject to science is a good one.
Right now the Catholic Church is RUSHING to canonize John Paul... suddenly a miracle has popped up regarding a nun that prayed to him. Amazing.... and the church, I believe verified it.... wow. Now if for his second miracle before canonizng this "saint" JP could restore the lives of the children that were assaulted by the Church... that would be a miracle.
I think, if I am hearing FNM correctly... as in this case, that he is saying just because someone said a miracle happened, does not mean it did. 40 witnesses will be nothing compared to the stamp of authenicity that the RCC places on this "miracle." They will roll out hundreds of experts and such to complete this sham. Doesn't make it true.
Anyway, FNM, I do not do this frequently, but if I took you wrong earlier in the thread, I apologize (if not, I stand by my "fool remark. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> )

MEDC

frog,

BK's suggestion for books to read, if you have serious questions, were good ones.

Lee Strobel was an investigative reporter and when his wife became a Christian, he was quite upset. He decided to use his skills as a reporter to investigate the evidence for Christ and His claims in an effort to disprove it all to his wife.

He came to the conclusion that the evidence FOR Jesus, the bible, the crucifixion and resurrection was overwhelming.

Your examples of what might have been called a miracle were good ones. In many cases of OT prophets trying to explain what they had been shown by God to happen in the far future, just such reasons may explain how you can have "chariots of fire" or flying beasts with scorpion stings in their tails. But what about specific miracles mentioned in the bible. Try to pick one and explain it in terms of modern technology or knowledge so that it becomes just a normal, natural process.

And I do know people who have had their sight restored without medical intervention. They all attribute it to a miracle by God, BTW. I also know someone who was diagnosed with late stage pancreatic cancer 11 years ago. Chemo did not work, surgery was too great a risk because of other health issues, including a bad heart. He was basically sent home to die.

But six months later, his CT scan showed a reduction in the area affected by the cancer and four months after that all signs of it had gone from the scans. He and his doctor both attribute it to a miracle of God, since no other explanation can be found for what happened. The man spent last summer building houses for the poor of Hermosa (and I don't mean the beach in CA) in Mexico that had been living in the garbage dumps of the city.

The group he worked with is run by a woman who also was "healed" of serious cancer (a multiple pound tumor in her abdomen that intertwined with most of her internal organs.) She was not treated by any doctor, but was checked by several, both before and after the healing she gives credit to God for.

My uncle was given 6 months to live, eight or nine at most, almost 10 years ago. He has prostate cancer that has spread to his bones. He carries X-rays around with him to show people the "hot spots" on the film of where the cancer involves nearly 100% of the marrow of the long bones of the legs and arms. He even has places on his skull that show clear evidence of cancer.

Though he has prayed for the cancer to go away, it has not, but his doctors are shocked every time he sees them because cancer that has reached the point his reached in only a few short months, just doesn't normally stop growing and spreading and simply hang around while allowing the patient to do the same.

My uncle's explanation is that God still has something left for him to accomplish. He seriously expects to be gone any day, but thanks God every time he wakes up beside his wife of almost 50 years and every time he sees his grandchildren or his two great grandchildren. He calls his current stage of life his "bonus years" since he did not expect to still be alive to enjoy them.

I also understand your bringing up magicians. Having done a few slight of hand exercises myself, I know that when properly executed there is often no one that can explain what they just saw happen. But God addressed that possibility when the magicians of Egypt tried to duplicate the miracles God performed through Moses and Aaron before Pharaoh. The magicians and wise men of Pharaoh's court were able to match Moses at first. Then they could explain away a few things like the river turning to blood. But in the end, God caused the first born of all of Egypt to die during the night while those he chose to protect from death (using the shed blood of an innocent lamb, BTW) were spared.

The next event was what many try to explain away as a natural occurrence, BTW. I haven't heard one that can't be countered as of yet. (Well, one guy claimed that the devil actually performed the miracle because he was the true god of Israel, but I don't think that even needs to be addressed. It serves no purpose to argue with acorns.)

Would you like to move this to a new thread or continue via email so we can stop this thread jacking?

Mark

I have a brother that is an oncologist and he sees this stuff on occasion... his take on it is..

we do not what causes all cancers and why certain people are vulnerable to the disease... there may be genetic issues inside some that allow them to protect themselves against an existing cancer or even by preventing them.
We just don't know. Possible miracle...yep. Possibly nothing more than a lack of understanding by the medical community right now... likely.

MEDC,

Thanks for the apology.

The reason I think this is the right place for this is the title of the thread. It implies we can discuss the bible.

You know at the beginning I didn't like the thread name but heck if you can't beat em join em.


Mark My father was a miracle. He was an alcoholic that ended up in the hospital. Cirosis of the liver. His body started shutting down. The doctors pulled us aside and said this is it. We hate to tell you this but he isn't going to make it out of the hospital. They let us bring him a birthday cake. A few weeks later we were taking him home. He had more medication then you could ever imagine with 3 months to live. Tops. He finally passed away about 7 years later. Only because he started drinking again.

The doctors couldn't explain it. Come to find out it is rare but it does happen.

You pointed to people who have these things happen and They call it a miracle and attribute it to Their God as they know him.

If I were Jewish and I know a few Jewish people that have experienced miracles but do not attribute it to Jesus Christ.

If I have time I will try to get that book. I am really busy with family life. So spare time to research now is not in abundance.

These are questions I have had for a very long time. I wish I had more people on my side.

You brought up Moses in your argument. He is Credited with writing Dueteronomy(sp) in most circles.

This is not entirely true. His death was described in duetronomy(sp) I doubt he could write about his own death.

So if I say the bible is a great moral compass that I wish to live my life by but I cannot take every word at face value based on these questions, that by the way I do not truely believe can be answered by any man. Me or you or anyone. Except for god himself.

I also believe that at the time of the writing of the bible society was so much different it influenced the writings. At the time what was written was certainly pertinent but 2000 years before and 2000 years later some of it may not have been.

I will use the 10 commandments:
If they were written in todays society I wonder if:
Coveting your neighbors house.
Definition of covet: wish, long, or crave for

Hey I covet all my neighbors houses. I live in an area where housing pricing is 2.8 times the national average right now.

Keeping up with the Jone's right. My sister is a born again christian she has a really nice house right now but she wants different one cause she has a lot of kdis. She Wishe's Longs and craves for her neighbors 5 bedroom home.

So we are sinners.

However the Lady that Smokes Crack, Drinks all day and beats her children? Those do not violate the 10 Commandments.

In today's world that wouldn't even make it on the Top 100 list of things not to do.

If written today

Thou shalt not Do Drugs might be there.
Thou Shalt not abandon your own children
Thou shalt not abuse your children.(remembering that child abuse at that time, as we define it today, was ok)
Though shalt not commit indsider trading.

Now mind you at the time the Bible was Written there was not really a middle Class. You were either wealthy or poor for the most part. Masters and Cerfs. So maybe if I was wealthy I could tell the poor it was a sin to Covet my house and if they did then they might go to ******.

It is ok to live in poverty now because you will live in eternity with God instead of in ******. So please do not take my belongings or my home or....

I am not doubting Jesus, or the entire bible, the crucifixition or any of that.

I am doubting the complete historacal accuracy of every detail in the bible.

I may say based on what I beleive for instance 50, 60, 70, 80, or even 99% of the bible is absolutely accurate.

Some of this can be attributed to Errors in Translation even.

Inacurracies in translation and even Society at the time of the Translations might influence How the Bible was translated.



So when I say in such a literal sense again maybe I used the wrong word.

Let me put it this way then. It seems to me that the more Christians I ask about something in the bible the more Literal senses there are.

On this thread alone There are christians disagreeing with the Literal sense of parts of the bible.

To throw the whole monkey wrench into it. If this thread were about, The Jewish Faith or the Islamic faith or any other faith. The same argument you guys have for me they would have too.

Not everyone can be right? But everyone thinks they are.

Me I am undecided.

Frog, that you are busy and have limited time is understood. The same can said for myself, and most likely for most others on the system also. Get the book Evidence That Demands A Verdict even if you don't have the time to read everything right now. You will find a wealth of data in there that addresses many, if not all, of the questions you have and in much greater breadth and depth than can be done in posting here.




You CAN say the Bible is a "great moral compass." Many people do so, without acknowledging Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. The Bible is about Jesus, as it's primary purpose. It IS preferable for people to live what is commonly called a "good moral life," but that has no real bearing on whether or not anyone is saved, which IS the primary reason for the Bible. It is to reveal to us what God wants us to know and to show us the one way that God has provided for us to be reconciled to Him. It does NOT say that if you "believe in the Bible" you will be saved. It says "believe in Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

There is a big difference between the two. The Scriptures are God's revelation to mankind and they are important, make no mistake about that. But in the "final analysis," they point to Christ, to how fallen mankind can be reconciled to God, not to varying opinions of men concerning "human authorship" of the books. Textual Criticism looks at the documents themselves. But I'll leave that for another time. Again, you will find a wealth of information in that book I recommended.

If you'd like a "simpler read," that is more of a basic "primer," let me further recommend you get a book called Know Why You Believe by Paul Little.

frog,

I think the Ten Commandments pretty well cover all of today's problems as well as those at the time they were written.

1) You shall have no other gods before ME.

This means that you will not worship anyone or anything other than the God who made the command. But it also means that you will not allow anything to usurp the authority that is rightfully His. This applies to us as well as other things people have attempted to make into gods.

If God is the one who has the rightful place to decide what is right and what is wrong, we do not have that right, even as it applies to us. This was exactly Satan's sin. He wished to place himself in the position of being his own god.

This is also the lie he told to Eve in the garden. He told her that she could make up her own mind as to what is right and wrong. Sort of predates postmodernism by few years, but the concept is the same.

I can understand the idea that Moses couldn't have written a book that describes his own death, but I think a couple options need to be considered before throwing the Bible's reliability out over that instance.

First of all consider the possibility that Moses did indeed write about his own death. If he was in close relationship with the God who gave him all the laws and commandments and actually was able to converse with God as is suggested, then there is no reason to think that God couldn't tell him, "This is going to be your ending and this is how I want you to write it down so that it will be remembered."

Another possibility is that Moses authored the book by dictating it to a scribe or group of scribes. This is how many autobiographies of famous people come about today. They go over their notes and memoirs, relate anecdotes that illustrate their lives and someone else actually puts it all to paper. At the end of the book, if the person who it is about dies before the book is released, an annotation is often made concerning that person's death that includes details that they themselves had no knowledge of when they died. The question then becomes does this negate the fact that it is an autobiography?

This is only two possible means by which Moses can be considered the author and mention of his death can be contained in the writing. It may be possible that annotations were added later in copying to add the information for future generations. But notice that this does not have any effect on doctrine of either Jewish or Christian faiths.

In part this is about the Jewish faith, since the OT of the Christian bible is the same as that of the Jewish people. Jesus was, in fact, a practicing Jew. He celebrated Passover, the Feast of Tabernacles, and even the Festival of Lights, which wasn't an OT celebration but a celebration of the inter-testament period from the time of the Makabim (Maccabees) during the reign of Antiochus. It also affects the Jewish bible as well as the Christian.

We do not have the original manuscripts for the books of Moses. We do however have copies of portions from before the time of Christ. Jesus often quoted from those books and not one time was it brought up as to the accuracy of the texts available from that time, either by Jesus or his detractors.

Questions concerning the authority of the bible most often stem from the fact that if the bible is what it claims to be, we must make a clear and simple choice. We must either chose to do as it tells us we should or not. Wanting to reserve that right for ourselves and not give it to God is the root cause of questioning its authority.

The bible is a book that can be studied. It can be researched for accuracy and completeness. What usually stops people from doing any of this is the fact that if they can find proof of the Bible's accuracy, then they no longer have any valid argument for not doing what it teaches.

Since Jesus claimed to be God, not just in the passage where He says "I and the Father are one" but in other instances as well, He cannot be simply a moral teacher. He must either be who HE claimed to be or a liar, and a liar cannot be a moral teacher.

As for additional commandments, if all ten of the top ten were followed by every person, there would be no murder, no theft, no adultery, no rebellion by teenagers, no jealousy, no lying to get one's own way...

Mark

FH,

Thank you. I may try, things will slow down here in about a month or so. I coach baseball and now we have been selected to coach the all star team. Which at the end of the day just eats up more of my time. LOL.

Absolutely they do. My point was the society at the time was different and IMVHO influenced the writing. Can't necessarily predict the future sins and again what we may consider morally reprehensible today back then was the norm.

Marrying family members, the age of consent etc. Shorter life spans girls were married at 12 years old. Today we would probably peg that as a sin especially if she was your second cousin. Then not so much.

So I used Coveting thy Neighbors house. Yes I agree with the first comandment. I think today it would still hold true if The commandments were passed down today.

But coveting thy neighbors house? Over Sleeping with children or beating them? Or the multitudes of what I would consider bigger sins then coveting a house?

Again though at that historic period in time the thought of living a wonderful eternity even if they had nothing now seemed like a good trade off. Don't rob or steal or kill the rich in this life and you will be rich in the next.



It is not my intention to throw the Bible's reliability out over that instance.

I don't want a couple of options to be honest. I want to know who exactly wrote it. That's all. If I don't know the scource then I will openly question the work product.

There are plenty of other parts of the bible that this occurs not just dueteronomy.

Again this is not to question the validity necesarrily of all of the bible.

In todays society we rely less on faith and more on proof an analysis through the scientific process.

If you were reading a book that claimed to be the truth but the acual author was unknown would you not question it? If it was written by several people. 40 maybe and you knew for a absolute fact that 33 were credible people but the other seven you didn't know about?


We have great moral teachers throughout history that didn't lead the most Moral life. Teaching morals is one thing living by them is another.

One can lie and still teach morality. There are morality classes taught today all over schools and I would bet some of the teachers are immoral.

Many a priest, rabbie, preacher etc preaches and teaches morality. We all know they can be very immoral.

I dont' know if I would call into questions someone's abiltiy to teach morality if they aren't moral. Then use that as an argument to prove he is who he says he is.

BK - thank you for your input. I really appreciate it.

Mortar - I would like to collect as many opions on this from a biblical perspective as possible. Have you a comment?

Thanks!

far

FAR,

Well if you were to go with what the Bible says there are two reasons for Divorce.

Adultery and Abandonment for a Divorce.

Only the victim can remarry.

Remember the bible says this about M.

"I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel (Malachi 2:16).

What God has joined together, let man not separate … I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery (Matthew 19:6, 9).

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 (Mark 10:11-12).

If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him (1 Corinthians 7:12-13).

I believe the Church would advocate calling the authorities and suggesting a seperation.

The seperation would be for safety and to give the abusive husband time to repent, find God and correct his behavior.

If a strict biblical interperation is used here she is not entitled to a divorce. So if she divorces him and remarries she is committing adultery unfortunately.

Just my opinion if we go with exactly what the bible says.

Frog,

I think that the mere fact that what was written 1600 years ago does cover what is happening in society today is what makes the Bible such a credible collection of writings.

As for what was common practice then and how that differs now has no bearing on the validity of the things that were written. Do not confuse the commands of God with the history of the people of the day in which these things were written. Jesus addressed a bit of this when He gave His dissertation on divorce. While it was common practice in the days of Moses for a man to divorce his wife for any reason whatever, Jesus pointed out that this was not God's intent from the beginning.

The life of David was a mess for the most part. He committed adultery, murder and disobeyed God often. Yet God called him "a man after mine own heart." The purpose of God in giving us the Bible wasn't to tell us that everything that was recorded was the way He wanted it to happen and in fact was often recorded for the purpose of showing us the ramifications of not doing things His way, complete with the consequences of not following Him.

While today we live much differently than people lived in the days of Moses, the real issues of family, marriage and life within society are still addressed in the pages of the Bible. It shows us not only how to live, but also how not to live.

And from a Christian perspective, the reason for the law was to show us how unable we are to do what God requires to merit His favor. To God there is no such thing as degree of sin. To Him, there is only one standard. Comparison must be made to Him, not to other sinful humans and so think we are secure because there is always someone worse.

This is why He provided a way for us to have His righteousness attributed to our accounts. He did what no other religion provides for. He did it by becoming one of us and accepting on Himself the punishment for all sin so that we can stand before Him and be found acceptable.

While to us it seems that murder is worse than bearing false witness, to God both are equally sinful. And the ultimate sin is that of thinking we are qualified to decide what is right and wrong for ourselves. It is repeating the sin of Lucifer and saying "I will be like God."

The point of faith is not the faith itself, but the object of that faith. I can believe sincerely and still be sincerely wrong. Faith in Christ isn't a leap of blind faith into darkness, but in fact a step of faith into the light. I do not suspend my intellect to practice my faith, but it is because of my intellect that I have come to faith.

I don't believe in the Bible, God or Jesus as Messiah in spite of my knowledge but because of it. Logic has played a significant role in my believing and I still search for answers to my questions. But I have chosen to believe in the things I believe in because my search has shown it to be accurate in whatever instance I can prove one way or the other. In the things I cannot prove either way, I choose to believe that because the Bible has shown itself to be truthful where I can find proof that it is truthful where I find none and in the absence of any proof that it is not.

I also caution that you not fall prey to the idea that because someone is not perfect, though they claim to be a follower of Christ that all claims of Christ and for Him are invalid. The sinful nature of Man is exactly the reason Christ died and what we all need to be saved from by Him. It is thinking that Christianity is a moral code that fosters that kind of thinking. Christianity is not a measuring stick moral code by which we are told to live, but a way for us to be saved in spite of our sin.

Also realize, that by my definition of what a Christian is, that is to say that acceptance of the free gift of God, extended to us by Christ's death and attested to by His resurrection is what makes one a Christian, not all who attend a church or even preside over a church are truly Christians. (That sentence got a little convoluted I'm afraid) I think that Mortarman and others here would agree with that definition, BTW. Thus previous statements that Christianity is not a religion at all, but in fact a relationship with the risen Christ.

Mark

Excellent posts Mark! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Mrs. W

Mrs w,

Thank you!

Mark

I never said parts aren't currently relevant. I said that the bible could be influenced by the time it was written.

He that spareth his rod hateth his son....

I can tell you right now if I picked up a rod/stick to punish my son I would probably have child protection services at my door.

The bible says that means I hate my son.


So coveting my neighbors house is the same as murdering somone In God's eyes? That is harsh.

Now another question about the Coveting that is probably different today but if taken literally I am pretty safe.

I can covet married women just not the married person that lives to the right of me and to the left of me. Probably based on the distance between homes back at that time this covered a lot.

So if I run down to the store it is cool to covet all the married women.

Oh by the way My Wife Can Covet the neigbors husband and she is safe.

Nice for her she only has 9 commandments to worry about.

But if I covet the women to the left of me and right of me I am just as bad as a murderer.

I know it sounds like I am joking but really that is what I read into your statement.

Now what I see is we are somewhat back to where this always starts and ends for me. You go back to the bible to prove the bible is right.

In todays day and age the burden of proof is higher then what it was when the bible was written.

I go back and say today if a book was written that preported to be fact there is no way that any portion that could not be definitively linked to an Author the credibility would be doubted.

I go back to one of my Original statments that many books of the bible have no known author. In some books like Malachi, it was probably Isiaiah that wrote it. Why??

I would say if a book I read was saying x y and z are true and they said the Proffesor B said so I might beleive it because Proffesor B is credible but if I found out that Proffessor B had nothing to do with Y and Z it was the garbage picker that added those, I would question the entire finding.

Going back and saying Proffesor B might have called the garbage picker later or he wrote him a letter later wouldn't cut it today.

If Moses Wrote Dueteronomy(sp) and it describes his death why isn't that miracle discussed?

If Moses could see and write about his own death that is pretty amazing. If after Moses died he spoke to someone else that would be pretty amazing. I dont' think that is included in that book. Why.

People can guess as to what happened. I dont' have a guess all I know is the fact a person cannot describe their own death unless a miracle occured. The bible is full of miracles this would be one that I would imagine would have been documented but it is not.

foundareason - the last time someone asked me for some advice "on behalf of someone else" it turned out that they were really asking for their own situation. Any chance this is really about you?

A couple of questions if I may. You may have already addressed these and I may have missed the answers, but if you wouldn't mind repeating, I would appreciate the answers as a help in guiding potential responses.

Is your friend a Christian?
Is her husband a Christian?
Are you "involved" with this woman?
They ARE divorced, so on what basis is the "church" (denomination unknown) telling her that she cannot remarry?

"Should not," "May not," and "Can not" are all different things. On what basis is "Can not" applied to forgiveness from God? "Can not" is a self-imposed restriction on God, BY God Himself and is perhaps better stated as "Will not." God has the ability, the capacity, to do anything He wills.

So what is it that forms the basis of "a friend that told her she can not re-marry according to scripture?"

Looking forward to hearing more about this situation.

God bless.