Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
@actscelerate Twitter  @actscelerate Facebook 

Rigid/legalistic doctrine concerning divorce and remarriage
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Where divorce and remarriage are concerned... roughridercog
Relative theology often kicks in.
We believe one way until it happens to one of our close relatives.
_________________
Doctor of Bovinamodulation
Acts Mod
Posts: 25139
2/15/20 9:54 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Serious question... Link
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Link wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Link, have you ever looked upon a woman with lust whom you were not married to? If so, have you plucked your eye out yet? Jesus was very specific about plucking your eye out if it causes you to stumble.

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. KJV

I still have my eyes, and I haven't castrated myself. What about you? I tend to view that as hyperbole.

I did break up with a young woman I was dating when I was in my early 20's before I met my wife because there were a few cues from her that I interpreted that there was a willingness on her end if I were to try to indulge fleshly lusts. That seemed dangerous and that was one reason I thought of when I decided to break up with her. An older friend of mine I talked with about it told me after the fact that this was like cutting off my hand. He took the passage a bit metaphorically.

But I don't see how interpreting the words of Christ or Paul on divorce and remarriage as hyperbole or allegory makes much sense in this case.

I like sex as much or maybe more as the next guy my age. I enjoy the companionship of my wife and having a family, too. But is being celibate akin to some kind of death sentence? Did Jesus marry on this earth? Didn't Paul live single? Didn't he recommend it as a superior lifestyle for being focused on pleasing the Lord. Timothy probably did, too. Is remaining unmarried or being reconciled a severe, heartless thing to recommend?


The reference to plucking your eye out is in very close proximity contextually to Jesus’ statements about divorce and remarriage. Why take one not literally and the other literally? How do we decide what is literal and what is not? It actually is better to maim oneself to stop sin than it is to be damned to hellfire. That part is literally true for sure.


Is this part of a line of reasoning 'less rigid' view of marriage and divorce? Do you think we should interpret Christ's words on divorce less literally somehow?
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11473
2/15/20 11:10 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post FLRon
Dave states it correctly when he says there are a lot of hurting people, ministers especially, that have had their hearts ripped out and credentials revoked because of an unwanted divorce, even though they were the innocent party and felt free to remarry. I have experienced it myself and I can assure all of you that there is no hurt like this.

Except maybe the hurt from those you once considered your fellow-laborers in Christ who abandon you. Especially denominational leadership.

One thing is certain, and that is on this particular subject, there are precious few places where one can find support in a judgement free, condemnation free manner. Most certainly that is the case here.
_________________
“No man is greater than his prayer life”.
Leonard Ravenhill
Friendly Face
Posts: 475
2/15/20 11:28 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Admittedly, I do not have the answer here....I wish I did... caseyleejones
I am still married to the same gal going on 30 years. My belief in divorce back 25-30 years ago was legalistic and judgmental and I thought I had the answer.

Today, I just don't know. Tom who posts here Very Happy ,..I won't say his last name ..... had some great links at one time to address this issue.

Anyway, I have heard here that if you don't divorce the second wife and go back to the first, you are in perpetual adultery. Somehow living the law of Love and law of Grace does not seem to support that in the NT.

I do believe there is forgiveness for the newly married couple who left spouses for the new ones within the church body. Observation, the new couple love God and are going to heaven but they are suffering from some major fallout with children and family. Let me reiterate, I have seen numerous people within church leave spouses and many having kids get remarried. Every single one of them had anywhere from moderate to major fallout with ex's and children for many many years. I heard one stat..can't find it at the moment but a divorce in the long run will cause you to forfiet 40% of your lifetime income.

I have yet to see a divorce and remarriage within the church that did not have long lasting effects. As one christian attorney told me who handles divorces, it's cheaper to keep her.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11631
2/16/20 9:48 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Cojak
In my first 20 years of life I knew only one divorced couple and a friend of divorced parents. Now, I know few children who grow to adult hood with the same parents.

I really believe if true Christian love was practiced nearly all of the divorces would be prevented and the couple would live together happily.

Even in the non Christian world if some patience and Love were exercised half of those would not happen. We have been married nearly 64 years now and I guarantee my girl could have found a few times to divorce me, using 'incompatibility', we had to learn like most, just learn to get along.

Work over the bumps. Yeah, I love her too pieces even if she is religious!

Anyway I sure wish I had the answers, this is a complicated important subject to say the least. Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed

In my short ministry I performed 2 marriage ceremonies. One has lasted over 50 years, the other lasted about a year. Do you keep track of the marriages you perform? probably most of you can't remember the many you did. Cool
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 23415
2/16/20 3:26 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Serious question... Quiet Wyatt
Link wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Link wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Link, have you ever looked upon a woman with lust whom you were not married to? If so, have you plucked your eye out yet? Jesus was very specific about plucking your eye out if it causes you to stumble.

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. KJV

I still have my eyes, and I haven't castrated myself. What about you? I tend to view that as hyperbole.

I did break up with a young woman I was dating when I was in my early 20's before I met my wife because there were a few cues from her that I interpreted that there was a willingness on her end if I were to try to indulge fleshly lusts. That seemed dangerous and that was one reason I thought of when I decided to break up with her. An older friend of mine I talked with about it told me after the fact that this was like cutting off my hand. He took the passage a bit metaphorically.

But I don't see how interpreting the words of Christ or Paul on divorce and remarriage as hyperbole or allegory makes much sense in this case.

I like sex as much or maybe more as the next guy my age. I enjoy the companionship of my wife and having a family, too. But is being celibate akin to some kind of death sentence? Did Jesus marry on this earth? Didn't Paul live single? Didn't he recommend it as a superior lifestyle for being focused on pleasing the Lord. Timothy probably did, too. Is remaining unmarried or being reconciled a severe, heartless thing to recommend?


The reference to plucking your eye out is in very close proximity contextually to Jesus’ statements about divorce and remarriage. Why take one not literally and the other literally? How do we decide what is literal and what is not? It actually is better to maim oneself to stop sin than it is to be damned to hellfire. That part is literally true for sure.


Is this part of a line of reasoning 'less rigid' view of marriage and divorce? Do you think we should interpret Christ's words on divorce less literally somehow?


It is a recognition that Jesus often spoke in hyperbole, which you know. I’d rather not believe Jesus contradicted Himself in the Gospels, giving an exception clause in one place and no exception clause in another.

In making an apparently rigid and inflexible comment in Matt 5, the Lord Jesus is underscoring how important marriage is, even going so far as to speak hyperbolically to the point.

He didn’t literally mean that maiming oneself could stop sin, for blind persons can sin just as well as sighted persons. He was emphasizing how severely we should aim to avoid all sin in our own lives, under His holy discipline. Likewise, He wasn’t saying divorce is never legitimate in any case, and all divorced and remarried persons live in perpetual adultery; He was underscoring how holy and important godly commitment in marriage is.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12539
2/16/20 7:13 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Serious question... Link
Quiet Wyatt wrote:

It is a recognition that Jesus often spoke in hyperbole, which you know. I’d rather not believe Jesus contradicted Himself in the Gospels, giving an exception clause in one place and no exception clause in another.

In making an apparently rigid and inflexible comment in Matt 5, the Lord Jesus is underscoring how important marriage is, even going so far as to speak hyperbolically to the point.

He didn’t literally mean that maiming oneself could stop sin, for blind persons can sin just as well as sighted persons. He was emphasizing how severely we should aim to avoid all sin in our own lives, under His holy discipline. Likewise, He wasn’t saying divorce is never legitimate in any case, and all divorced and remarried persons live in perpetual adultery; He was underscoring how holy and important godly commitment in marriage is.


What about verses about not fornicating or committing adultery outside of divorce? Are those literal, or should we take them as extreme statements that indicate how hard we should strive to please God? How about just a little murder or drunkeness? Are the Bible's instructions on these to be taken with a grain of salt?

There is more to hyperbole on the eye and hand issue. Jesus also said in Matthew 15,
19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

Was Jesus trying to say that plucking out your eye would prevent you from sinning? He said if it would, it is better to enter into life halt or maimed. Did he mean for us to interpret that as a solution.

Did the apostles' take the teaching on marriage and divorce as hyperbole? They said if such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better for a man not to marry.

Look at Cojak's post. When he was young, he scarcely knew any divorced people. I had the same experience among Christians in Indonesia, though I did know a few. But the number has been increasing, a little uptick, nothing like here.

Back when churches took this 'literally' and were serious about it, there were few divorces. Society took divorce more seriously then than now. When it comes to marriage and divorce, society as a whole in the 1930's to 1950's may have been more 'sanctified' than a lot of churches are nowadays.

regarding the exception clause, I understand interpreting an less detailed passage in light of a more detailed one. I have also read that the exception clause might be rendered to say, "setting aside the issue of fornication"-- as if He were not discussing that with His comments. I am not saying I am sold on that, but I may consider it as an area of further study. That would be consistent with the doctrine of many early Christians on the issue.

Doesn't it seem likely that the church loosening its stand on divorce and remarriage, moving toward more of an acceptance of 'no fault' situations for example, has contributed to more widespread fornication and acceptance of gay marriage? If we loosen the standards away from Biblical standards, that invades other areas.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11473
2/17/20 8:13 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
Oh I absolutely am opposed to “no fault” divorce. I think it is the height of absurd relativistic immorality.

You ask some good questions. I am definitely not in favor of divorce, especially “for any reason,” as the question was put to Jesus. I do think a middle course between the old-line, “perpetual adultery” concept of D&R and the “no fault divorce” concept is needed. It is so hard to find a happy medium.

I’m not suggesting compromise; i’m suggesting we should allow for divorce where Scripture allows it (in my view, in cases of adultery and abandonment by an unbeliever) and recognize that when man puts such marriages asunder, God recognizes the innocent party as free from their former vow due to the breach of covenant by the guilty party.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12539
2/18/20 11:06 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
and recognize that when man puts such marriages asunder, God recognizes the innocent party as free from their former vow due to the breach of covenant by the guilty party.


So if a couple argue and get a divorce, but because of some issue over a child, come to you, together for advice, and one of them suggests remarrying, what would you do in that case?

Btw, can you show me in scripture where marriage is based on vowing particular words and keeping them? That is a cultural thing we do on top of getting married. Husbands used to give fathers a bride price in the Old Testament.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11473
2/18/20 6:02 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Bro Bob
My mom and dad will celebrate their 65th at the end of this month. Regina and I were married over 42 years. I am 63 and pretty healthy and active. I HATE HATE HATE being alone.

You don't have to be a genius to figure out how to fix that.

And lucky Bob, in the age range our culture will accept, single females outnumber males about 4:1

Honestly, I have never studied the question in this thread until recently.

I agree with Jesus, the marriage I had and Cojak has and my mom and dad have had is what God intended for every human.

But marriage was NEVER NEVER NEVER ONLY ABOUT SEX! It was always about doing right by your spouse and then when kids come they need what created them: TWO PARENTS.

But my search for truth is making it look like I am not supposed to marry any woman who has ANY prior husband still breathing. And this regardless what he did or if any of them were even saved at the time.

It sure seems to me like we have proven there is more than one unpardonable sin.

BTW, only 16% of widows remarry within the first 25 months while for widowers it is 60%

..............

As to the legality of the question, Moses did give one exception, and Jesus acknowledged it. But as soon as there is one exception religious experts will immediately divide over its meaning. This is what Matt 19 was about, can I divorce her only if she cheats or for anything that I decide I don't like?

One thing we rarely hear anything said about is that only men could give a divorce, and it was actually a release that did the woman the favor of allowing her to be free, often for the first time in her life. And that freedom DID allow her to remarry because it is stated that if #2 divorces her or dies she cannot THEN go back to #1.

Nobody suggests we use the rules King David or Abraham or Jacob lived under. Half the tribes of Israel are from Leah, 2 from the other wife Rachel (her SISTER!) and two each from handmaids of each. Anybody recall where that was ever forbidden in scripture? Can I marry 2 widows???

................

Look, twice Jesus came upon women who were clearly out of line. And twice he was forgiving of them. I believe he wanted them to just stop what they had been doing. I don't believe starting over, fresh and repentant and forgiven would have been something he would forbid.

But that is just me. And there are some amazing high Calvinists that will allow all kinds of other things, but if a man like me, saved at age 6, not always perfect but always repentant and trying to live right and do right, if I were to marry a woman whose husband beat her, might even be in prison for killing their own kid, if I marry her I am committing adultery not just that day, but I am one who has chosen a life of sin, and that means my salvation at age 6 was never real.

Youtube John Piper on this question. And also David Pawson.

Sorry everyone. I don't have the answer to this one. I just want Jesus to come back.
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3917
9/6/20 9:22 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Bro Bob wrote:

And lucky Bob, in the age range our culture will accept, single females outnumber males about 4:1


Quote:

But that is just me. And there are some amazing high Calvinists that will allow all kinds of other things, but if a man like me, saved at age 6, not always perfect but always repentant and trying to live right and do right, if I were to marry a woman whose husband beat her, might even be in prison for killing their own kid, if I marry her I am committing adultery not just that day, but I am one who has chosen a life of sin, and that means my salvation at age 6 was never real.

Youtube John Piper on this question. And also David Pawson.


Do they address the salvation issue and say if you marry someone you are not supposed to you were never saved, or just that it is a sin?

If you are outnumbered 4 to 1, why would you marry a woman with a living husband? If you marry, marry someone you can marry with a completely clean conscience. And why do you have to be limited to the age range our culture accepts? Smile What is that range, btw? Is 50 too young? What about 45?

I had a conversation on Facebook with a man who talked a lot about his connections to people in the prophetic movement who said he was a missionary to the Philippines. Apparently, there are some older American men who go there and marry much younger women. He called this prostitution because he said they would support the woman's parents, and the women's parents would let him marry her.

I found that kind of disturbing since it wasn't based on anything Biblical. Supporting parents is Biblical, and so are bride prices. There is no restriction in the Bible on age gaps in marriage and examples of marriages with age gaps like Isaac and Rebecca, Onan and Tamar, Boaz and Ruth, etc. The idea that it is immoral to marry someone much younger or older than you are is just a cultural one and not a Biblical one as far as I can see. It's also a practical consideration. When I was young and single, I wouldn't have wanted to marry a senior citizen. But if another young man did, I couldn't say it is a sin.

He said he was preaching on this topic in church, and an older man married to a younger woman came up and punched him in the face, then he bragged about besting the older man in a fist fight. It sounded to me like if he was calling a man's wife a whore just because of their age difference, maybe he had the punch in the face coming to him.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11473
9/6/20 10:58 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Bro Bob
Trying not to stray too far from the original post in the thread, I do think we need to understand that there are at least 3 components involved here.

1) What does scripture say?
2) What will any decision open us up to by our own culture?
3) What is practical for the two primary and almost unlimited secondary persons that will be affected, regardless of what culture says?

BB
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3917
9/7/20 10:44 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Carolyn Smith
I've always remembered a sermon given to us at our church's local ministerial training classes several years ago. The woman teaching about marriage said that Jesus said, "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.” (Matthew 19:8)

Her comment was, "What are you doing with a hard heart?" Christians shouldn't have hard hearts.

I later did a SS lesson about having a hard heart. A hard heart doesn't happen overnight. It happens over a period of time where we allow our hearts to grow hard towards the ones we love.

I can't give you scripture and verse on this, but my advice to women in abuse situations has always been, "If you are abused and feel your life is in danger, get out. God can heal your marriage but He can't do anything if you're dead."

Ultimately, my usual response for women considering divorce is, "You are the one that has to stand before God for this. You are the only one that can make this decision," so they would be aware of the weightiness of this decision.

For most women, divorce is NOT the easy way out. It generally means if you have kids, you are still stuck in a relationship with this man for the rest of your life as it regards to the kids. Most women's financial situation becomes worse unless she remarries...usually much worse.

I am against divorce in general, but I do not believe it is God's best for women to stay in abusive situations. (My personal opinion, not scripture.)
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5617
9/7/20 12:29 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Best writing I've found on the topic... Tom Sterbens
David Instone-Brewer

https://www.divorce-remarriage.com/

http://www.instonebrewer.com/DivorceRemarriage/DRC/IndexBook.htm
(Pretty sure the entire book is available online through this link)

Pointed Questions Answered Here
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4495
9/7/20 1:14 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Link
We also have to keep in mind that 'abuse' is also used for unhealthy situations where people say bad things. Just imagine if someone like Donald Trump were married to someone like Rosie O'Donald. There are terms like 'verbal abuse' or 'financial abuse.'

Then there are also those who have hair trigger on using terms like 'verbal abuse'. For example, some of the models you read about from domestic violence centers, which typically have feminist literature, will consider combinations of slightly unpleasant to normal male behaviors to be part of a pattern of 'abuse.' Quoting scripture makes up part of one of the models I saw of abusive behavior.

If you have pastors and other Christians telling someone in a difficult marriage saying 'if there is abuse, get out' and their understanding of 'abuse' comes from reading websites with a very low bar for what constitutes 'abuse' that can lead to some confusion.

You can also end up with people justifying divorce and remarriage based on being abused when no one hit the other.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11473
9/7/20 1:15 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Tom Sterbens
Link wrote:
Just imagine if someone like Donald Trump were married to someone like Rosie O'Donald.


Wow...what a mouth their kid would have!
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4495
9/7/20 1:17 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Carolyn Smith
Link wrote:
We also have to keep in mind that 'abuse' is also used for unhealthy situations where people say bad things. Just imagine if someone like Donald Trump were married to someone like Rosie O'Donald. There are terms like 'verbal abuse' or 'financial abuse.'

Then there are also those who have hair trigger on using terms like 'verbal abuse'. For example, some of the models you read about from domestic violence centers, which typically have feminist literature, will consider combinations of slightly unpleasant to normal male behaviors to be part of a pattern of 'abuse.' Quoting scripture makes up part of one of the models I saw of abusive behavior.

If you have pastors and other Christians telling someone in a difficult marriage saying 'if there is abuse, get out' and their understanding of 'abuse' comes from reading websites with a very low bar for what constitutes 'abuse' that can lead to some confusion.

You can also end up with people justifying divorce and remarriage based on being abused when no one hit the other.


I don't tend to read or espouse feminist literature, so that is not the kind of abuse I mean. Mainly, I mean physical abuse.

However, I would consider verbal abuse from a narcissistic spouse in which the wife is constantly verbally attacked, talked down to, made to feel less than human or like they are crazy (gaslighting) as something the woman should get away from unless God has told her to stay.

And sometimes God has impressed women to stay in very unhappy marriages in which they are treated very unfairly and the relationship is awful. If they will remain faithful to God and their spouses, sometimes He will turn the situation around for them. That's why women need to hear from God for themselves as well as receive counseling. And women in these situations would probably benefit more from a Christian counselor than from a pastoral counseling session. Most of the time, they can't afford it, though.
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5617
9/7/20 2:13 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post ...took him 9 months.....LOL caseyleejones
Tom Sterbens wrote:
David Instone-Brewer

https://www.divorce-remarriage.com/

http://www.instonebrewer.com/DivorceRemarriage/DRC/IndexBook.htm
(Pretty sure the entire book is available online through this link)

Pointed Questions Answered Here
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11631
9/7/20 6:07 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Best writing I've found on the topic... FLRon
Tom Sterbens wrote:
David Instone-Brewer

https://www.divorce-remarriage.com/

http://www.instonebrewer.com/DivorceRemarriage/DRC/IndexBook.htm
(Pretty sure the entire book is available online through this link)

Pointed Questions Answered Here


Thank you Tom for these resources.
_________________
“No man is greater than his prayer life”.
Leonard Ravenhill
Friendly Face
Posts: 475
9/7/20 9:37 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Death Before Dishonor...or Divorce! Aaron Scott
And by "death," I mean that one should kill their spouse, since it is far easier for the church to overlook the temporary bad judgment of killing one's spouse than it is for them to overlook actually divorcing one's spouse.

I have written about it elsewhere, so I will give you the "short" and sweet version.

The moral commandments are designed for the NORMAL RANGE OF HUMAN INTERACTIONS. For instance, one was to keep the Sabbath holy...unless there was an EXCEPTIONAL CASE--like an ox in the ditch.

And lying is wrong...well, except for cases like the Hebrew midwives who LIED to Pharaoh about why so few male infants were being killed on his orders. Further, God BLESSED the midwives.

In normal circumstances, we should never lie. But in exceptional cases--typically ones where and even greater moral wrong would occur--we do the right thing.

EXAMPLE: It's 1943. You live in German Occupied Territory. You are hiding Jews in your basement. A knock on the door. A group of Nazi soldiers ask you whether you know of any Jews in hiding...and whether you know of any Jews YOU were hiding.

Well, to tell the truth causes a greater moral travesty: The death of innocents. So you lie. And you do so without God's judgment, I believe. BUT ONLY IF IT IS TRULY AN APPROPRIATE EXCEPTION FROM THE NORMAL RANGE OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND CIRCUMSTANCES.

When Jesus spoke of divorce, I have come to believe He was speaking in the same tone as the Commandments He (or perhaps His Father) gave to Moses. He was addressing only the normal range of marital (mis)behavior. There are too many exceptions to be listed exhaustively, I imagine.

A woman who tried to make a wise choice in marrying someone, finds that he will not work, he is physcially abusive, and even hurts the kids? Shall she stay on, trusting that the God Who allowed her teeth to be knocked out will protect her children?

No. At some point, she must make the MORAL decision about which is worse: living with a beastly man who threatens the welfare of her children and home...or divorcing him.

I could go on: child molestation, alcoholism/drug addiction, violence, criminal activity, child endangerment, etc.

What a terribly foolish thing to believe that once a woman (or a man) chooses a spouse, then NO MATTER HOW HE TURNS OUT OR WHAT HE BECOMES, she must either stay with him forever...or live single for the rest of her life.

In a nutshell, some believe that ONLY IF the man commits adultery is the woman free to divorce (and some foolish folks don't even believe that). That is, only if he does the ONE THING Jesus spoke of that justified divorce. But do we believe that Jesus was speaking exhaustively?

What about the wife of the BTK killer? She and her family had NO IDEA this man was traveling around killing people. He has a life sentence...does she get one too because she didn't have the discernment to know this was a serial killer in the making?

I say no. Something is wrong when we think that it is somehow BETTER for a woman to take an ax to her husband so she can remarry a better person...then for her to divorce her husband and remarry.

I simply don't agree with it. If there are exceptions to who can eat the showbread, then there are exceptions to the "save for the cause of adultery/fornication" statement of Jesus' comments on divorce.

No, the fact that there are exceptions must not be used to justify just wanting a better deal. But there are dealbreakers in a marriage. Adultery it the one most usually in the range of normal behavior for humans. But there are other cases.

A man should never think he can do anything EXCEPT commit adultery and his wife will have to stay with him, etc.

Just my thoughts.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5560
9/8/20 8:29 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
World News Network | Acts-celerate Chat
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.