UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> Divorce / adultery


10/8/10 3:16 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3214
 
 I'd like to start a spinoff discussion from the 'Gay sex again....' thread, and talk about divorce and adultery.

My understanding of divorce is that, historically, the Catholic church has not permitted divorce (although they do have annulments) and the Orthodox have accepted divorce and remarriage but not without some censure (correct me if I'm wrong.) Most Protestants frown on divorce theologically but in practice seem to permit it, along with remarriage after divorce. Some denominations however, do not permit remarriage under any circumstance, and this is the bridge I want to use to start the discussion.

Jesus said that the only reason that God allowed the Jews to divorce was because of the hardness of the hearts; but in the beginning it was not so. He later told the disciples that if any man divorces his wife, except for the sin of fornication, if she remarries, he causes her and her new husband to commit adultery.

Paul seemed to loosen this restriction when he said that if an unbelieving spouse wishes to depart, let them depart God has called you to peace. It isn't really ever spelled out if remarriage is permitted, but it alluded to in the verses where he says if you burn with lust it is better to marry, although he was speaking to virgins and widows particularly.

Most people understand fornication in Jesus' instruction on the matter to mean that the married woman may be divorced for adultery; but another explanation I've read is that it does not mean adultery but exactly what it says - fornication, or sex before marriage. In those days a woman was expected to be a virgin when she married. If the man found out on their wedding night she was not a virgin he could divorce her for the cause of fornication - sex before marriage. If this is the case, it doesn't even seem that Jesus permitted divorce in case of adultery.

Now, in practice, Christians and non-believers alike tend to divorce and remarry willy-nilly. But what is the Bible teaching on this, and is this teaching for all times and cultures or just ancient Israel?

Some denominations won't permit remarriage after divorce, and some even call for couples who come to Christ after divorce and remarriage to divorce again and seek reconcilation with the first spouse.  Some denominations only permit divorce and remarriage for the spouse who's partner committed adultery.  And some say it is ok to remarry as long as one repents of the adultery / divorce; God calls them to peace and wants to keep whatever family has been together now, in tact.

And to muddy the issue further, the verses pertaining to divorce mention a man divorcing his wife but not a woman divorcing the husband.

What is the opinion of the denizens of the Holy Ground on this issue?
10/8/10 7:26 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 20458
 There is no biblical solution to this question any more than there is for all the other disagreements in Christendom.  People trust to the teachings of their various interpretive traditions.  
10/9/10 6:40 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6340
 Grakman, Let me ask you a question, when you stand for judgement, will you be allowed a lawyer? will you be allowed a priest?

No, you will stand alone,

God is an individual relationship, a Father/Child relationship, He loves and treats you as His child.

Do you discipline your children when they do wrong?

Do you love your children and want only the best for them?

Do you cry, when they decide to be stubborn and do it their own way?

Religions rules, are written by children, why put so much trust in them?
10/9/10 6:48 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6341
 "It is better for your seed to drop onto the belly of a whore, than one drop to drop to the ground."
10/9/10 7:35 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Juijitsuboxer
50 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 8240
Robert Wynne -  "It is better for your seed to drop onto the belly of a whore, than one drop to drop to the ground."



Genesis 38:7-10:

7And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.

8And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.



In that passage, Onan "spills his seed upon the ground" rather than give it to his brother's wife. She's not a whore; she was just following the practice of the day by marrying her brother-in-law after the death of her husband. It's called "levirate marriage".
10/9/10 1:15 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6346
 assuming is a deficit...we're quoting from different books.
10/9/10 2:57 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3229
Ridgeback -  There is no biblical solution to this question any more than there is for all the other disagreements in Christendom.  People trust to the teachings of their various interpretive traditions.  

 / thread?
10/9/10 3:18 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 20474
Grakman - 
Ridgeback -  There is no biblical solution to this question any more than there is for all the other disagreements in Christendom.  People trust to the teachings of their various interpretive traditions.  

 / thread?

 This is why I stopped the whole proof texting thing a long time ago.  People are not guided by the Bible, they are guided by their interpretive authorities. The real decision isn't what the Bible teaches, but what tradition has teaching that accurately reflects in the wholeness of scripture.  The necessity for a teaching authority is demonstrated several times in the NT anyway.  Jesus had to open the scriptures to the travelers on the road to Emmaus.  They knew the scriptures, but understanding their deeper level was completely blocked off from them.  The truth is a lot of modern Americans cling to their fantasy of Biblical guidance because it means they can be their own individual guides and never have to submit to a larger authority.  I just don't think a person can grow in this situation.  It is like going to a "diagnose yourself and choose your own treatment" hospital.
10/9/10 4:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3234
Ridgeback -  People are not guided by the Bible, they are guided by their interpretive authorities.

 Good point. We say we're guided by the Bible but somebody still has to decide what the writer meant. More than a 1000 years later, removed from the time, place, culture where the letters were written.

Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley... Charles Taze Russell, Joseph Smith.... Charles Stanley, Joel Osteen, Tim LeHaye... lol (sorry made myself laugh putting this list together.) 
10/9/10 4:37 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 20477
Grakman - 
Ridgeback -  People are not guided by the Bible, they are guided by their interpretive authorities.

 Good point. We say we're guided by the Bible but somebody still has to decide what the writer meant. More than a 1000 years later, removed from the time, place, culture where the letters were written.

Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley... Charles Taze Russell, Joseph Smith.... Charles Stanley, Joel Osteen, Tim LeHaye... lol (sorry made myself laugh putting this list together.) 

 I'll take Wesley out of that bunch.  At least he read the Greek fathers.  ;-)

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.