RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Life] >> Marriage



Message

p.progress -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/15/2008 11:42:37 PM)

8/15/2008 9:36:38 PM


SealedEternal says:



quote:

I agree, but nevertheless every marriage I've attended did ask both parties to make unconditional vows to stay together until death do them part, which is consistent with God's regulations in scripture.



quote:

I don't think there's anything wrong with taking that particular vow however since it is biblical:



quote:

You are correct though, that everyone who enters His institution, is joined together by Him, and subject to His regulations whether they vowed to them or not:


Yes, well for those that have done or do this, only add to their obligations: 1st what saith God to them; and 2nd, what they say to him.

Yet we know that their vows or the breaking of them, and what man claims all this means and provides 'exceptions' to, mean nothing to God - as they are first foremost and ONLY required to do as he says in all that he says regarding the one-flesh relationship.


P.P.



Butterflytearz -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/16/2008 1:07:12 PM)

quote:

For a man to take what he has no right or authority given to him to take is not only a violation of other things in scripture, it is and you (all of us) need to get a sure grip on this, that the taking of the daughter not given but refused to be given is to break at least the 10th commandment - read it. For the daughter to attempt to marry when her living father refuses her to is to break the 5th commandment - read it. It still applies even in this culture. This is wrongful marriage and needs to be annuled - it is fornication, and if they separate, she may marry another whom her father DOES give her to.


PProgress

The living Father is God,,, He is the one who can lawfully give his daughter or son in marriage. If you are thinking on these lines then I agree.

If we marry one who is not of the Lord,,then that marriage is of the world.



Butterflytearz -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/16/2008 1:14:28 PM)

quote:

I take what you said above to mean that the reason you don't sense you are free to reconcile, is because your husband is not willing as yet to do so, not that you are not willing. It is good that you are not of the mind to "marry another", as that would not only constitute adultery on your part, but would show that you let die within you faith and hope; that you stopped having faith to pray and believe for (more importantly) the 'hope' of your husband's salvation.


I cannot remarry my ex unless he has a change of heart. And no,, right now he is not willing.

I also stated in my post I am a peace with being single,

My ex is in great bondage to things of the flesh. I could write a book about it but I have forgiven him for he knows not what he does so I leave him in God's hands.



p.progress -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/16/2008 6:31:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Butterflytearz

quote:

For a man to take what he has no right or authority given to him to take is not only a violation of other things in scripture, it is and you (all of us) need to get a sure grip on this, that the taking of the daughter not given but refused to be given is to break at least the 10th commandment - read it. For the daughter to attempt to marry when her living father refuses her to is to break the 5th commandment - read it. It still applies even in this culture. This is wrongful marriage and needs to be annuled - it is fornication, and if they separate, she may marry another whom her father DOES give her to.


PProgress

The living Father is God,,, He is the one who can lawfully give his daughter or son in marriage. If you are thinking on these lines then I agree.

If we marry one who is not of the Lord,,then that marriage is of the world.




quote:

"If you are thinking on these lines then I agree."


No, Butterflytearz. No, I'm not "thinking on these lines" - on or as I think you meant to say 'along' "these lines", so you are free to disagree.

Do you know what 'spiritualizing scripture' means; what 'spiritualizing' a passage, or concept or teaching that God clearly sets forth in scripture means?

While it is certainly true that God is a Father, the Heavenly Father of those born of his Spirit after they have received the forgiveness of their sins through accepting his Son in their place for the punishment of their sins; THAT FACT does not CHANGE, ALTER, SWEEP AWAY this FACT, that all that he has written for his children WHO STILL DWELL ON EARTH, is STILL in force, and they are STILL commanded to live in conformity to (OBEY and follow) what he has written for them to keep and obey.

And among the things that the children of God who still dwell in the flesh and walk in this present world are to 'keep', are the commandments relating to the relationships that God has established within the sphere of family relationships, as well as other spheres of human relationships. That means that when God said to Moses "Honor thy father and thy mother", and when Christ reiterated this, and later Paul his apostle did again, and applied it to who [?] - not only to the children of this world, but clearly and specifically as well to the 'CHILDREN' of God (the Heavenly Father, ...to believers, the saints, disciples and their children.

That is to say that we are subject the the law of God here on this earth; in his law he says to honor thy father and thy mother; in his law we read much of the authority and rule of the father over his household - which includes of course his children...his daughters. And if you don't understand that or even want to try to begin to examine whether this is so or not from a careful and thorough study of both the OT and the NT, then that is your choice of course.

But the fact remains that daughters (specifically being spoken of here) are subject to their father's rule (authority). And neither unbelieving daughters nor believing daughters are free or at 'liberty' to marry whomsoever they will - out of or in the Lord.

I am not under the Law, but that does not free me to violate either the letter of the Law, or the spirit of the Law. And I am not referring to those these contained in ordinaces or the priestly sacrifical system that was certainly done away with, and by no means 'carried over' to the New Covenant, that Hebrews addresses. The commands regarding the relationships of husband to wife, wife to husband, father to children and children to their father, has not been done away with, annuled, fulfilled or otherwise. And you can see this is still true by reading Paul's and Peter's use and application of the Holy Scriptures to the saints, the children of God.

And in 1Cor. 7:36-38, Paul has turned from the subject of the widowed (8-9), the married believers (10-11), the married believer to the unbeliever (12-16), the virgins (25-28, 31-35) to that of the father's of virgins...virgin daughters.

You might try to say that this is not being addressed to the father of any virgin, but only to the virgin himself, and speaking about whatever it is that you want it to say to your ears. But the language and phrases when taken in their fullest context, the fullest contextual setting that only having studied this subject as it is presented and discovered throughout whole of the scriptures, will be easily show you that Paul was addressing the father's prerogative right to either "keep his virgin" daughter and not 'give her' in marriage to any man; or to exercise his prerogative rights to "give her in marriage" to the man HE finds worthy of his daughter.

The scriptures are not just recording wha the cultures of those times did and practised under a patriarchal role. The scriptures record that the cultures at those times were more in conformity to the will of God in these matters than those of these "latter times". I can say this with some degree of confidence and little fear of any genuine contradiction, because the Law ordained this as well. God's law was not accomodating the whims of the culture, it set the standard. And in that standard, the rule of the man, the husband and father is clearly expressed and spelled out - and it is so in the writings of the apostles...in the New Covenant, that the Testator, Christ gave to them for us to "keep".


If your earthly father and brothers and guardians are dead, well then you it would appear are at liberty THEN to marry whoever you will...oh except you are not at liberty to marry another woman's husband, or a woman, or your uncle, or an animal - only an man who is free before God to marry...and oh yes, "only in the Lord".


P.P.



p.progress -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/16/2008 6:39:08 PM)

[quote]ORIGINAL: Butterflytearz

quote:

I take what you said above to mean that the reason you don't sense you are free to reconcile, is because your husband is not willing as yet to do so, not that you are not willing. It is good that you are not of the mind to "marry another", as that would not only constitute adultery on your part, but would show that you let die within you faith and hope; that you stopped having faith to pray and believe for (more importantly) the 'hope' of your husband's salvation.



I cannot remarry my ex unless he has a change of heart. And no,, right now he is not willing.

I also stated in my post I am a peace with being single,

My ex is in great bondage to things of the flesh. I could write a book about it but I have forgiven him for he knows not what he does so I leave him in God's hands.





quote:

"I cannot remarry my ex unless he has a change of heart. And no,, right now he is not willing."


If he is not willing, it is because his heart is not right as yet. So it stands to reason that you cannot re-marry him - he's unwilling But if he was willing, you I take it are willing to re-marry...re-unite with him. Good, I am glad your heart is still tender towards God in that way. God bless



gmc4Jesus -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/16/2008 11:54:18 PM)

I haven't been able to get on in several days and I noticed some comments after my last post #9652. Although someone else may have already said what I'm about to say, I will repeat it because you, like me, are not likely to go back and read over 9500 posts to see what everyone else has said. That said, here's my comments.

Some have itterated that to divorce and remarry is adultery and the Bible does state (in more than one place in the New Testament) that the immoral and adulterers will not inherit eternal life. That being the case, how can anyone who is already divorced and remarried have eternal life?

If you recall, in Matthew 12:31 and Mark 3:28-29, Jesus said that the only unforgiveable sin is blaspheming the Holy Spirit. If you follow the purpose of the Holy Spirit - to lead people to Jesus so they can be saved, then how does a divorced and remarried person get back into God's grace?

John 1:17 reminds us that grace came through Jesus Christ. Many other verses advise forgiveness of those who repent and believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior. God is not the God of laws and works, but the God of grace. Paul refers to it again and again.

The point is this. If someone has divorced, that is sin. If they remarry, that is also sin. However, if they have acknowledged their sin and repented, God will not refuse to forgive them. The only criteria is whether they acknowledge Jesus as Lord and are sincerely trying to follow Him.

Paul reminds us that, even as a Christian, he still struggled with sin. All of us will acknowledge that we struggle with sin, whether it is sexual or not. Is any one sin forgiveable and another sin not forgiveable? Only the sin of rejecting Jesus.

Divorce and remarriage are forgiveable sins. The person who will not inherit eternal life is the one who does not repent of his sin. In so doing the unrepentant sinner is denying the Holy Spirit's testimony of the salvation that is available in Jesus Christ.

I would pray that everyone take their marriage vows seriously and learn to get along with and love their spouse. I would also pray that those who are divorced will repent and commit their life to living according to God's standards. I also pray that any who are remarried, after having divorced their first spousel, will ask God to forgive them and make a stronger commitment to make this marriage last a lifetime.



SealedEternal -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 11:12:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmc4Jesus



Some have itterated that to divorce and remarry is adultery and the Bible does state (in more than one place in the New Testament) that the immoral and adulterers will not inherit eternal life. That being the case, how can anyone who is already divorced and remarried have eternal life?


By repenting of what Jesus defines as adultery, which means to end the extramarital relationship and cease from committing the sin from then forward. Repentance is not saying sorry and then continuing on in the sin, it is changing ones mind about the sin and turning from it. If remarriage after divorce is adultery as Jesus said, then the first marriage is still valid in God's eyes after the divorce, and the second so-called "marriage" is an extramarital affair of a married person having relations with someone who is not his or her spouse. Therefore repentance must involve ending the adulterous affair, and if possible reconciling with the one who God regards as the true spouse.

SealedEternal



benelchi -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 11:14:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmc4Jesus



Some have itterated that to divorce and remarry is adultery and the Bible does state (in more than one place in the New Testament) that the immoral and adulterers will not inherit eternal life. That being the case, how can anyone who is already divorced and remarried have eternal life?


By repenting of what Jesus defines as adultery, which means to end the extramarital relationship and cease from committing the sin from then forward. Repentance is not saying sorry and then continuing on in the sin, it is changing ones mind about the sin and turning from it. If remarriage after divorce is adultery as Jesus said, then the first marriage is still valid in God's eyes after the divorce, and the second so-called "marriage" is an extramarital affair of a married person having relations with someone who is not his or her spouse. Therefore repentance must involve ending the adulterous affair, and if possible reconciling with the one who God regards as the true spouse.

SealedEternal



But that command goes against the clear written instructions given in Du. 24:1-4; I must assume that this is Sealed's command and not Jesus'



SealedEternal -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 12:12:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmc4Jesus



Some have itterated that to divorce and remarry is adultery and the Bible does state (in more than one place in the New Testament) that the immoral and adulterers will not inherit eternal life. That being the case, how can anyone who is already divorced and remarried have eternal life?


By repenting of what Jesus defines as adultery, which means to end the extramarital relationship and cease from committing the sin from then forward. Repentance is not saying sorry and then continuing on in the sin, it is changing ones mind about the sin and turning from it. If remarriage after divorce is adultery as Jesus said, then the first marriage is still valid in God's eyes after the divorce, and the second so-called "marriage" is an extramarital affair of a married person having relations with someone who is not his or her spouse. Therefore repentance must involve ending the adulterous affair, and if possible reconciling with the one who God regards as the true spouse.

SealedEternal



But that command goes against the clear written instructions given in Du. 24:1-4; I must assume that this is Sealed's command and not Jesus'


No it doesn't, unless you confuse the legal provision for a type of divorce to those under the Old Covenant, with divorces by those not done according to the Old Covenant provision, or by those who are not under it, which Jesus said result in adulterous extramarital affairs when the person remarries, because God doesn't recognize the divorce as legal, and thus they are still married to the original spouse. You have to rightly divide the Word rather than mixing and matching verses to fit your own agenda.

Adultery by definition is not a marriage, but is a married person having relations with someone who is not his or her spouse, or someone having relations with someone elses spouse. That is entirely different than a legal Old Covenant divorce for an Old Covenant man who found his wife unchaste when he married her as the Law said. And Jesus told the Pharisees that even if the Old Covenant man divorced his wife for any cause other than fornication, he committed adultery by remarrying and made her commit adultery by illegally divorcing her, so even for Old Covenant people divorce and remarriage as we know it always resulted in adultery. You can't mix apples and oranges to accomodate a doctrine, but must properly put both sets of commandments in their proper context.

SealedEternal



keepingfaith -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 1:45:52 PM)

quote:

But that command goes against the clear written instructions given in Du. 24:1-4; I must assume that this is Sealed's command and not Jesus'


Actually the command is from Jesus...Exodus 20:14- "You shall not commit adultery."

Notice the placement of the following warning...

Matthew 5:29-32
"If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell." "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. " "It WAS said, 'Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce'; BUT I SAY to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."

Luke 16:18
"EVERYONE who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery."

Mark 10:11-12
"WHOEVER divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."

Hebrews 13:4
"Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge."

1 Cor 6:9-11
"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such WERE some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Galatians 5:19-21
"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God."



car2ner -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 2:14:55 PM)

and none of those verses continue on, "verily I say unto you, therefore go and divorce yourselves again....."



SealedEternal -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 3:26:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: car2ner

and none of those verses continue on, "verily I say unto you, therefore go and divorce yourselves again....."


Obviously, since if it is adultery then by definition it is not a legal marriage in His eyes, and doesn't require a divorce.

SealedEternal



benelchi -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 3:53:35 PM)

quote:


Matthew 5:29-32
"If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell." "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. " "It WAS said, 'Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce'; BUT I SAY to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."


Let's just underline the part of the verse you just want to ignore.



keepingfaith -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 5:49:37 PM)

quote:

Let's just underline the part of the verse you just want to ignore.


So what you are saying is that UNLESS I commit adultery against my spouse and they divorce me for that reason...I am not free to remarry without it being adultery? But, if I am innocent and my spouse divorces me I cannot remarry because it will be adultery? That is how that verse reads... if you accept your interpretation that the exception is for adultery.

Please tell me that is not what you are saying. I know that is not what Jesus could have possibly meant...giving the exception to the adulterer and not the innocent party. So we have to commit the sin in order for it not to be the sin we are trying to avoid committing?

What about this part of the verse that you ignore? "whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."



keepingfaith -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/17/2008 6:05:39 PM)

quote:

and none of those verses continue on, "verily I say unto you, therefore go and divorce yourselves again....."


His Word doesn't tell those in same sex unions to "divorce" either, and some are getting "married" as we speak...



Butterflytearz -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/21/2008 4:44:29 AM)

quote:

Do you know what 'spiritualizing scripture' means; what 'spiritualizing' a passage, or concept or teaching that God clearly sets forth in scripture means?


Yes,, and it is not the flesh that can spiritualize but only the Spirit,, the Holy Spirit.

Now all this about the father having authority to give the daughter and if it is refused no one has the right to marry the daughter is the law of the time. Since we no longer are under the law we are under grace,, that also means we now walk in the spirit.

If the father is an unbeliever and the daughter is a believer ,, Which living father has the right to give the daughter.?



p.progress -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/21/2008 5:10:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Butterflytearz

quote:

Do you know what 'spiritualizing scripture' means; what 'spiritualizing' a passage, or concept or teaching that God clearly sets forth in scripture means?


Yes,, and it is not the flesh that can spiritualize but only the Spirit,, the Holy Spirit.

Now all this about the father having authority to give the daughter and if it is refused no one has the right to marry the daughter is the law of the time. Since we no longer are under the law we are under grace,, that also means we now walk in the spirit.

If the father is an unbeliever and the daughter is a believer ,, Which living father has the right to give the daughter.?


I'm sorry, I meant were you familiar with the faulty methods of scriptural 'interpretation' called or referred to as 'Spiritualizing' the Scriptures? If not do familiarize yourself with them.

While it is certainly true that only those that have the Spirit of God dwelling in them can understand the things of God, for they are only spiritually discerned; it is also true that the Spirit indwelt person (believer and child of God) can be "deceived" or "led astray" by "the error of the wicked". There are teachers in the professing Ekklesia, that both unknowingly and knowingly corrupt the Word of God and substitute their own "private interpretation" for that of the Scripture's interpretation for that of a word, or phrase, or passage or subject found in the Scriptures (whatever be the true interpretation of these).

So the meaning of the expression "Spiritualizing Scripture" is not understood to mean a good, sound and valid method of interpretation, but a false one.

I asked in reference to your previous post.

Now, regarding your statement above:

quote:

Now all this about the father having authority to give the daughter and if it is refused no one has the right to marry the daughter is the law of the time. Since we no longer are under the law we are under grace,, that also means we now walk in the spirit.


Please do read the book of Genesis....again, and again and again. And please don't get offended at me saying this in an instructive way.

Genesis is what? It is a narrative accounting of the Creation of course, and the creation of man and making of woman. But it is a narrative accounting of the lives and numerous events in the lives of men from Adam on through to the death and mourning of Jacob and Joseph (after when Jacob and his family when down into Egypt, his death and the death of Joseph).

And Butterflytearz, all of this events took place WAY BEFORE 'THE LAW' WAS GIVEN - WAY BEFORE THE 'OLD COVENANT' WAS PUT INTO EFFECT.

So please, let us be clear here when we speak of 'Old Testament' as opposed to the giving and ratification of the Law - that is the 'Old Covenant' in the 'Old Testament'. The book of Genesis is NOT recording the lives of anyone "UNDER" THE "OLD COVENANT" or "TESTAMENT"!

Again, the book of Beginnings records the lives and events in the world and the lives of the people living back then through those many centuries. We read of the 'customs' of those times. But be careful not to read into these narrative accounts, that Genesis is merely recording and reporting what the 'cultures' back then were praticising; rather than being alert to the 'possiblity (I believe 'fact') that Genesis is actually recording that many things you might think and call the customs of their cultures, were in fact founded upon the knowledge of God's WILL and WAYS back then.

This understanding was known back in the beginnings, which then LATER IN THE LAW God revealed in 'black and white' (so to speak), what he will is...his UNCHANGING will is in many areas of human relations and relationships. Again, we know...we can know, that the subjects of substitutional-sacrificing of [clean] animals; and that of even circumcision; and that of the Household of God being limited to that of the family and nation of Israel; and the issues of a human Priestly system (consisting exclusiviely of the men from the tribe of Levi), and all that was otherwise required to "keep" and follow under the 'old covenant' (established at Mt. Sinai) is NOT something we need to concern ourselves with.


The Spirit of God will lead the obedient believer to fulfill the righteous requirements of the LAW.

So now, what of the ICor.7:36-38 passage? Paul wrote it. Is it authoritative or not? What does he speak of therein?



Butterflytearz -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/22/2008 9:48:21 AM)

quote:

This understanding was known back in the beginnings, which then LATER IN THE LAW God revealed in 'black and white' (so to speak), what he will is...his UNCHANGING will is in many areas of human relations and relationships. Again, we know...we can know, that the subjects of substitutional-sacrificing of [clean] animals; and that of even circumcision; and that of the Household of God being limited to that of the family and nation of Israel; and the issues of a human Priestly system (consisting exclusiviely of the men from the tribe of Levi), and all that was otherwise required to "keep" and follow under the 'old covenant' (established at Mt. Sinai) is NOT something we need to concern ourselves with.


Dear P Progress,

I agree with you here,, we need not concern ourselves about those things because Jesus fulfilled them all on our behalf....

The Law still stands but is kept 100 % by Jesus



p.progress -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/22/2008 4:11:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Butterflytearz

Edited:
quote:

"This understanding was known back in the beginnings, which then LATER IN THE LAW God revealed in 'black and white' (so to speak), what he will is...his UNCHANGING will is in many areas of human relations and relationships. Again, we know... ...is NOT something we need to concern ourselves with.


Dear P Progress,

I agree with you here,, we need not concern ourselves about those things because Jesus fulfilled them all on our behalf....

The Law still stands but is kept 100 % by Jesus



Yes, Christ certainly "fulfilled" 'THOSE THINGS' that I inumerated IN the specific PORTION you quoted from the above post.

But BFT, I only used THOSE' few factual 'THINGS', for a purpose: To point to another rather obvious fact of Scripture, that while it is certainly true, that these specific aspects in the 'LAW' have ALL been 'fulfilled' in FULL by Christ; and so, they then are NOT AFTERWARDS ever REQUIRED to be practised or 'kept' ANYMORE...NOT by those UNDER the 'New' Covenant, that NOW IS.

YET, there are other aspects to God's WILL and LAW, that have NEVER been and will never be done away with, and which are required TO BE be practised ('kept') by those UNDER the 'New' Covenant that NOW IS. And so to do that which is against them, that is "contrary" to them ("contrary to sound doctrine") is NOT acceptable to God.


Now, if the apostles commanded us to submit to and obey our masters - if we be a slave; to be in subjection to our own husbands - if a woman and (lawfully) married; to be subject to, to honor and to obey our parents - if we have any; and to the wife who deserts ("departs") her husband: to remain unmarried - but rather be reconciled to him; and to the wife - not to "marry another" - even though it was your husband that put you away to "marry another", else you "shall be called [trade named] an adulteress", are we free from these laws, if we "walk in the Spirit"[/ "because Jesus fulfilled them all on our behalf...."? That is the impression your answer, I might argue, could easily appear to be the case.

Read what we are commanded in the letters of the apostles NOT to do: steal no more, lie not, not to bear false witness, not to defraud one another, not to fornicate, not to eat things sacrificed to idols, not to eat blood, or things strangled...etc., etc., etc...AND TO honor our father and mother - which were clearly 'old' testament/covenant commands. Did Christ fulfill all this for us, so that now we are free do these things?


You say in the former post [#9916] this:
quote:
quote:

Now all this about the father having authority to give the daughter, and if it is refused, no one has the right to marry the daughter, is the law of the [that] time. Since we no longer are under the law we are under grace,, that also means we now walk in the spirit.


You clearly imply that the laws with regard to the authority and prerogative rights of the father to either "give her in marriage" or NOT to "give her" in marriage, was rescended, dissolved, destroyed...or otherwise NO LONGER required to be thought of as still relevant, LET ALONE to BE 'kept'? Is this not true? You say, because "IS the law of this time" - meaning I suppose that that law, 'WAS the law of THAT time'?

Well, is that not true of all the other laws and commandments that we can find in the 'new' covenant that were first found in the 'old' covenant? Such as the the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and or through to the 10th commandment in the Decalogue (minus the Sabbath, for sake of argument with some here)?

Does 'walking in the Spirit' mean to you, you're exempt from keeping these laws, thus free to trangress against these Laws, by virtue of your being 'under' the Law of Christ and 'not under the Law'? Have you, we all been granted some kind of immunity from being judged a sinner and transgressor of these Laws - if you do so? Are we free to consider them no longer in force?


The issue of the father's divine authority and prerogative rights with reference to his children, in particular either to "give in marriage" or "keep his virgin" daughter from marriage and utterly refuse to give her in marriage (until what time if any he may be willing to give her), is not right to think that it has been done away with or dissloved...a mere strange and curious relict of the past.


I asked you about the 1Cor. 7:36-38 passages. You have either purposely ignored this, or as I think, it just didn't register too strongly in your mind, because you are not too familiar with this aspect of the Word of God, and thought it not important to address. I wish to hear your interpretation of this section. For I say that if you do choose to study this issue out, you will find that you cannot so easily set it at nought.

The language of the scriptures will guide you to discover that the will of God in this area has not been destroyed and made of non effect. As the traditions of men in this generation of professing Christendom have lead you to believe. Read the scriptures for what they are and what they say. Then let your own notions yield to the presuasive arguments they (the scriptures) present for the continuing of this area of God's will.

Look up the words: daughter, give in - given in [marriage], gave her, give them, take her to wife, took her to wife, virgin, maiden, father's house...these are a few to mention. Once you have done so in a thorough and honest way, you cannot help but see what the will of God is in all this...and the wisdom of God in this principle as well.


The 1Cor.7:36-38 passages are interpreted by some to be referring to the male virgin himself, whether HE is able to keep his own virginity or whether he ought to marry. But the language does not support this nearly as well as the fact that Paul was NOW addressing another catagory or group of questions from the Corinthians, that of the fathers of virgins. Paul had already addressed the male and female virgins from verse 25 thru 28, and 29 thru 34 and 35. The expression "give her in marriage" is to be interpreted by other passages that speak of and use the same language elsewhere. Do that, and you'll understand what Paul was addressing and who he was speaking to - the most likely speaking to is you wish.

But the fact is that the 'new' covenant does not and did not do away with the wisdom of God, which is contained in the laws and commandments of God, in which the WILL of God is revealed to us.

The fulfillment by Christ of the Law, does not mean we are free to sin, just because we are not under the Law. WE are now FREE to obey from the heart that form of doctrine we have received - through the Spirit. The Spirit of God is not going to lead us to violate the wisdom of God...his Law...those we know are contained in the 'new' covenant. Discovering what all these good commandments are, is the trick to be sure. Especially when so many of us have been brainwashed to believe something that the Law of God is not and something that is not true about our relationship to it.

All this to say that a daughter who marries without her father's consent...let me put it this way. A daughter that thinks to have God honor her rebellion against her father's refusal to give her in marriage to a man who he deems unworthy to give his daughter to, "to wife" (whether the man is or is not), is not entering a lawful union that God sanctifies; BUT is commiting fornication against God and her father.

So with respect to the 're'-marriage issue: She, if she repents, and returns to her father's good graces, may in time at his will, be given in marriage by him without having perpetrated a fraud and caused his daughter to commit adultery. As her first so-called 'marriage' - legal though it was to be sure in the eyes of the state - nevertheless was bogus. For it requires the will of her father - the earthly father of the woman, to 'give; his daughter, before God will honor their emotional and physical intimaces.

And as said before, in the event her father is dead, and she has no other lawful guardian over her; then she is free to marry as she pleases...beter yet, as she would think that her father truly might think right and wise to marry.


An addenum:
Look here at these familiar passages. What of them (which I greatly condensed from that I would have rather included here as well):
"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"..."Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body...for ye are not under the law, but under grace. What then? shall we sin, because we are not 'under the law', but 'under grace'? God forbid." [Rms.6:12-15, 1-23 at least]

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them..., but after the Spirit...For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God...That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit...mind the things of the flesh; ...the things of the Spirit." [Rms.8:1-5, and on]

"...walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are [these]; Adultery, fornication...strife...murders...and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told [you] in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God...If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. [Gal 5:16-25]



car2ner -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/23/2008 8:13:58 AM)

quote:

All this to say that a daughter who marries without her father's consent...let me put it this way. A daughter that thinks to have God honor her rebellion against her father's refusal to give her in marriage to a man who he deems unworthy to give his daughter to, "to wife" (whether the man is or is not), is not entering a lawful union that God sanctifies; BUT is commiting fornication against God and her father.


I do not agree that a woman must have a father's approval to marry, there are more than a few disfunctional fathers out there that do not have sound judgement. This was for a time when women had no rights and it took a male head of household to handle the leagalities.

That being said, I do think (IMHO) that unions made outside of God's will, even first unions, do not automatically become holy and to be preserve unto death. This I saw with a warning: it is too easy to say "it was never God's will that we marry" even if it is a union our Heavenly Father approved of.



p.progress -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/23/2008 5:15:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: car2ner

quote:

All this to say that a daughter who marries without her father's consent...let me put it this way. A daughter that thinks to have God honor her rebellion against her father's refusal to give her in marriage to a man who he deems unworthy to give his daughter to, "to wife" (whether the man is or is not), is not entering a lawful union that God sanctifies; BUT is commiting fornication against God and her father.


I do not agree that a woman must have a father's approval to marry, there are more than a few disfunctional fathers out there that do not have sound judgement. This was for a time when women had no rights and it took a male head of household to handle the leagalities.

That being said, I do think (IMHO) that unions made outside of God's will, even first unions, do not automatically become holy and to be preserve unto death. This I saw with a warning: it is too easy to say "it was never God's will that we marry" even if it is a union our Heavenly Father approved of.



Yes. I understand that you do not agree. But I want to draw your attention to a few things here. Which I hope for your sake you'll be able to take to heart and think through.

You say: "I do not agree that a woman must have a father's approval to marry".
Your stated reasons you claim you reject this:
1.) Because: "...there are more than a few disfunctional fathers out there that do not have sound judgement"
2.) Because: "This was for a time when women had no rights and it took a male head of household to handle the leagalities."

Both reasons and claims have no basis in scriptural truth (the revelation of God) or sound scriptural logic (interpretational principles). Rather, both are rooted in relativistic humanism - subjectism.

This is the of result of failing to recognize when one has been and is being at this very moment "spoiled" of the truth - 'robbed blind' of the truth and ways of God, through the philosophies of men. Which 'spoiling' [being robbed of] WE ALL HAVE BEEN ignorant victims of; as WE ALL have been 'feed' ('nursed' so-to-speak) at the 'breasts' of the culture WE ALL have been immersed in since birth; and our parents from thier birth and theirs (and so on).

What I say, I say not condemningly, nor in a patronizing way, nor out of arrogant ignorance on my part. I did not conjure this up in my own mind, then cut out pieces and slices of this and that verse to make a 'patchquilt' private 'doctrine' of mine. This does not 'fit' my preconceived notions. You can reject it if you will, I am only relating what I have come to understand from my study and harmonizing of the passages that speak to this issue throughout the scriptures. I could provide a specific list of these, but you are able to find these passages as well - and they are not exclusively found in Exodus through Malachi, but found also in the letters of the apostles and the book of Beginnings, Genesis.

You and I are commanded to STOP BEING "conformed" to this present world (its thoughts and ways - its philosophies) and "be transformed" by the Word of God (that is adopt and adapt to HIS philosophy). To shed ourselves of the error we grew up with, both in the world; and even that which we ignorantly accepted and learned within the professing Church. We all need to understand, believe and take to heart the sober fact that we are all warned by the Lord and by the apostles Peter and Paul and the other apostles about being deceived into believing false teaching that 'sound' 'good' and 'fair' enough to one's ear, but are empty of the truth that is only to be known by being very careful, honest and diligent in the study of the scriptures. They warned of false teachers that would arise in the Ekklesia, and lead away many into following their ways that would cause "the way of truth" to be blasphemed - "evil spoken of". Well here is an area of human relationships that I have found God to not leave us to wonder about, much less follow and do 'that which seems right' in our own eyes to do. You deny and reject this, but you haven't done what is needful and refute it from the scriptures...you haven't even attempted to, all you have offered is your subjective 'feelings' based what it appears you deem to be of greater value and weight in your mind than the testimony of Scripture: The ever downward, wayward and broadening way that the world 'thinks' is right. That is how I see it and I am not yet convinced by the 'evidence' you offered up that we have or will ever be able to prove that what you are claiming is "sound speech that cannot be condemned" - shown to be erroneous.

Again, you say: "I do not agree that a woman must have a father's approval to marry".
Your stated reasons 'why' you 'think' this and reject this fact are:
1.) Because: "...there are more than a few disfunctional fathers out there that do not have sound judgement"
2.) Because: "This was for a time when women had no rights and it took a male head of household to handle the leagalities."

And what I say here to you I say to all:
The issue of what you refer to as "disfunctional fathers", or the "rights" you speak of: Where pray tell, in which specific passages in scripture do you read, where God provides any alleged exemptions or exception clauses for children and wifes - and I'll even add here servant/slaves - that excuses them from not only honoring and reverencing their respective divinely ordained authority in these respective realms, but exempts them from the submission/subjection and obedience God gave numerous commands and instructions regarding? "Bring forth your strong reasons" and your "many infallible proofs" - NOT from your mental store-house of unproven claims, but from the pages of the Scriptures of truth. and that passage of the scriptures at this world grants, what has that to do with the anythingtruth?

The scriptures...and mind you, the 'NEW' TESTAMENT' scriptures do not say to the servant/slave:

"Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; ...ONLY to the good and gentle...;
that is "...be subject to your masters with all fear, [BUT] ONLY TO..." - the balanced or NON-DISfunctional masters.

But rather Peter the apostle says, by the authority of Christ and according to the WILL of God:
"Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward."

And to the wives Peter does not say:
"Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; ...if any obey... ...the word,"; or only to the balanced, obedient, NON-DISfunctional husbands

But Peter says - again, by the authority of Christ and according to the WILL of God, NOT what the humanistic professing Christians wish it to say:
"Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear."

And pray tell, where in the whole of scripture, does God qualify his commands regarding honoring, subjection and obedience to one's father and mother even one time, with respect to what you claim about them being 'disfunctional'? Where are these exemptions innumerated and plainly expressed as you seeme to 'think'?

What 'rights' that men contrive, have been granted by God, the authority (power and right) to supercede and cause the Word of God to subordinate themselves to them? Such wicked (anti-Christ) laws and 'rights' have no such power to supercede, by any means the Will, Way and Thoughts of God. Where does God say follow the civil laws of a perverse nation in a crooked generation when they are contrary to his laws, ways and commandments? No where.

Such 'rights' you speak of mean less than nothing - and to follow them in the face of the clear word of God is not only folly but damnable folly.

And as for the "disfunctional fathers" that are out there today. They are not the first one's to fail to do that which was in the best interest of their children - specifically speaking now of daughters, relative to the matter of "giving" them in marriage to a suitable man. There are at least several examples of men...fathers, who gave their daughters in marriage to men that I would never consider worthy of giving my daughters to and granting them to take them to wife. No way would I willing agree to place any of my daughters under the rule of certain men I read of in the scriptures or have known personally in my own life time. But the scriptures do not promise freedom from suffering wrongfully (modern term: 'abuse'), or even the heartache of a selfish father (disfunctional). To 'think' and claim so is impossible to prove from scripture...I realize this won't stop many from still trying to claim this as fact. And to 'think' and claim that God has changed his ways and will here, and stripped fathers of this paternal right established long, long ago by God and set forth in clear enough language for the honest of heart to discover it, is not mere naivete, but worse.

The daughter that assumes the 'rights' you speak of, does so without being able to support their assertions and vain hopes that this is true.



No offence here. But please don't even bother to respond, unless in a serious way; and unless you effectively refute what I've stated with 'facts' of scripture, not with personal subjectivism - what one 'feels' and 'thinks' is fair and right. I do truly welcome and desire to hear substanitive evidence to support your 'reasons' and claims...but I know you cannot provide any, but don't let that deter you from trying. Just be ready to be challenged therein as well.

And all this is to make the point regarding 'remarriage': For those daughters (at least), who do marry in defiance of their father's will, does not qualify as a lawful union. For thus God does not honor the intentions of either the man that covets his neighbors daughter, and steals her from him; nor does God honor the intentions of the defiant, dishonoring and disobedient daughter. And should she repent and return to her father's house, uf he wills it later for her to marry, she is free to do so and not be counted an adulteress, but a repentent fornicator. She along with the widow and the returning departed wife, may marry again without sinning in doing so. The lawful wife is not free to marry another while her husband is still alive...even the wife whose husband put her away is not at liberty to marry another, else she commits adultery as does he who marrys her.


P.P.



car2ner -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/24/2008 12:09:12 PM)

quote:

No offence here. But please don't even bother to respond, unless in a serious way;


It is my style to add a thought to the agruement and let the readers take it or leave it.
I have added scriptures in the past, "seriously" discussing this issue.
The words of Jesus tell us to be "in this world, not of it" which implies one must take the culture into consideration. There is alot of practicle application to God's word, not just spiritual. This includes the direction to get a father's approval.

For the record, my wonderful daughter's intended has passed the "are you good enought for our daughter" meeting with my husband. But that is based on wisdom, not on legalism.



huckfinn327 -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/24/2008 4:11:43 PM)

Greeting Dear Reader:


Jesus' definition of marriage is the "Truth" regarding what constitutes marriage and Jesus' definition of divorce is the "Truth" regarding such an act.

Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Mar 10:7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
Mar 10:8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
Mar 10:9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

I believe His words above contain the truth regarding marriage and divorce.


All for His Glory ... Huckfinn



p.progress -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/24/2008 7:27:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lastblast

quote:

ORIGINAL: car2ner

That is a fair reply.

Now let me ask you this. Love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, self-control, etc... Those are fruits of the Spirit. Do you believe that folks who are remarried, no matter the reason for divorce, are in sin and therefore how do you explain the remarried couples whose marriages reflect these traits? Since it is by the Spirit, these are not character traits that we can display consistantly in our own strength.


I knew someone who exhibited all these traits and more------consistantly..........and he was NOT saved until the very end of his life!!! Hard to explain, isn't it? The fact is that there are many who can consistantly walk in these traits........many Buddists, hindus, etc., yet I know from their profession that they do not REALLY walk according to the Spirit.

Now if you're asking if I believe remarried people can walk by the fruit of the spirit.......I personally do believe so. I believe remarried people can love God in part of their lives, but be as deceived in their sin as any one of us can be deceived.

The fact is that we have been desensitized to sin. We are no longer appalled by it........in ourselves as well as in others. We live in a society now that believes that "I" and "my needs" are tantamount. It did not used to be this way in the U.S. The same exact marital sins exist today that have always existed, yet today, our responses are very different............and now we see huge numbers of families ripped apart. For me, all I can see is unforgiveness and a lack of commitment in our society.

Let me give an example of how I think someone can be walking by the Spirit(at least appearing such outwardly), but be SO wrong in some moral area of life. I personally know of a pentacostal pastor and his 2nd wife. They were in a wonderfully happy marriage---10 years. Then one day while out on a walk, they just started talking about Jesus' sayings on divorce/remarriage. BOTH of them suddenly were convicted that they were in an adulterous relationship----both of them. Just seconds earlier they were as happy as can be together with no care in the world. They were loving God and serving Him together..........

See, I believe conviction can come upon someone in an instant, then a whole life of deception can be torn away and the person have EYES to see truth. Yet, that person is really no different than they were towards the Lord right before the Lord opened their eyes. They still loved the Lord, but didn't SEE yet. That is how I view those who are remarried in opposition to the Lord's Will---those who truly DO love the Lord...........they just don't SEE yet..........but I believe they will someday.



Car2ner,
What you asked lastblast, about the appearance of the 'fruit' of the Spirit, I see that the example that lastblast has given fits the scenario very well. I believe that your in the same frame of mind.
And further, only God himself can open one's eyes and show them their sin they're in and give them "the gift of repentance" as Paul speaks of to Timothy.

There is a reason why Peter warns of the time when false teachers would arise and teach things that would be readily swallowed up by professing believers in the latter times. People who are not grounded fully in the fear of God and love of God, will fall victim to the error of the wicked. And that error is as Peter speaks of, couched in the language of "liberty"...the "promise" of "liberty". Liberty from what and for what? The liberty do those things which soberer minds 'keep' straight that God has forbidden to be a practiser of...do.

Those who accept the error of the wicked, do so, so that they can exercise their new found "liberty", and still 'feel' they were acceptable to God.


You, I have noticed, answer out of your subjective experiences. I understand that. And I understand the pain...the pain of betrayal. The maddening pain and utter disbelief of losing a spouse to their own sin and selfishness (not to say the 'innocent party' is so 'innocent' at all times from undermining that which they find themselves losing one day in total). And I understand the internal pressures that work within a person that seeks for 'a way of escape' from the heartache, great grief and loneliness that being desserted bringsw into the life of the deserted. And I understand the natural urges that can work to undermine the reality of an existence of an eternal kingdom that while wonderful and beautiful to contemplate as a reality to come in time, it at times can be or seem to be of no present help to quench the present natural desires for love compassion and intimacy from a companion in life...one's "one-flesh" wife (or husband).

You wish to accuse me...label me a 'legalist'? That is something you will have to answer one day for - if you are falsely accusing me of this. I can say that I don't believe you really understand at all what you are talking about when you attach that label to people. As I am neither a so-called 'legalist', nor a Pharisee, if that term is what you really mean to call me. I would ask you to define this term, but it is not really necessary here.

Calling or implying that a person is a so-called 'legalist', who holds you to the "hard sayings' in the written Word, in an area you don't want to revisit; on account you have chosen long ago to believe lie which 'promises' you the "liberty" that you want, is a vain attempt to deflect the force of the truth in the words that condemn the adultery that one has become guilty of through "marrying another".


I have read your earliest posts, so this is why I have said I understand where you are coming from - 'as well'.


P.P.



SealedEternal -> RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread (8/24/2008 9:59:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: car2ner

It is my style to add a thought to the agruement and let the readers take it or leave it.


The problem is that many here regard Christ as our Lord, so your thoughts aren't really pertinent when they contradict His Word. As a "Christian" (aka follower of Christ), my thoughts, your thoughts, his thoughts or her thoughts mean nothing, but Christ's are the only that matter.

quote:

I have added scriptures in the past, "seriously" discussing this issue.


You really tend to give your thoughts and rarely quote scripture, and on this particular issue I'm sure you haven't because, as Pilgrim pointed out, there aren't any to back your "thoughts".


quote:

The words of Jesus tell us to be "in this world, not of it" which implies one must take the culture into consideration.


No, the whole point of that statement is to say that His people, despite living in the world, are not to be conformed to the cultures of the world, and should not regard them worthy of consideration.


quote:

There is alot of practicle application to God's word, not just spiritual. This includes the direction to get a father's approval.

For the record, my wonderful daughter's intended has passed the "are you good enought for our daughter" meeting with my husband. But that is based on wisdom, not on legalism.


God's Word gives the direction to get a father's approval because it is the most wise and practical way to avoid choosing the wrong spouse. You yourself apparently recognize this fact with your own child, but reserve the right of women to refuse to accept God's way, if her own "thoughts" are that it is unnecessary to do so.

SealedEternal



Page: <<   < prev  395 396 [397] 398 399   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI