Divorce is rejection of God

[arunangelo]

In marriage; a man and woman unite their lives in love. This love that unites them is God. God therefore becomes the binding force in their marriage; and through Him, with Him and in Him they can express His love to one another. God stayed faithful to His covenant with his people (his spouse) although they were unfaithful to Him, rejected Him and betrayed Him. Furthermore, in His faithfulness to the covenant with his people, he saved us from eternal damnation by accepting the most painful death. We too are called to love our spouse as God loved us (Ephesians 5:25). We must therefore deny ourselves and take up our cross daily and follow what Jesus did (Luke 9:23) by accepting pain and suffering in order to bring healing to our spouse; especially when there is hurt, unfaithfulness and betrayal. Those who are obedient to the word of God are able to do this; because faithfulness to His words enables us to live by his spirit.

Since God is the binding force in a marriage it is permanent and no human organization can dissolve it (Matthew 19:4-6). Divorce therefore is rejection of the covenant (binding force), rather than its dissolution. Remarriage after divorce therefore is adultery (Luke 16:18). Furthermore, since God is the binding force in marriage rejection of it through divorce is rejection of God. Furthermore, when we a rejects his spouse through divorce He is rejecting God (Matthew 25:31-46).

 

[P31Woman]

Jesus said if a spouse is unfaithful we can divorce. Jesus would NEVER say that if divorce equals rejection of God.

See Matthew 19:9

 

[farouk]

Jesus said if a spouse is unfaithful we can divorce. Jesus would NEVER say that if divorce equals rejection of God.

See Matthew 19:9

There are two different words there in Matthew 19.9, fornication and adultery. In the heavily Jewish context of Matthew's gospel, the 'fornication' mentioned in verse 9 would seem to relate to the espousal period, before the couple came together, as in the time when Joseph, being a just man, and not wanting to make Mary a public example, was minded to put Mary away privily (before he understood about the virgin birth). This in fact seems to be the context of the Lord's 'exception clause'.

 

[farouk]

In marriage; a man and woman unite their lives in love. This love that unites them is God. God therefore becomes the binding force in their marriage; and through Him, with Him and in Him they can express His love to one another. God stayed faithful to His covenant with his people (his spouse) although they were unfaithful to Him, rejected Him and betrayed Him. Furthermore, in His faithfulness to the covenant with his people, he saved us from eternal damnation by accepting the most painful death. We too are called to love our spouse as God loved us (Ephesians 5:25). We must therefore deny ourselves and take up our cross daily and follow what Jesus did (Luke 9:23) by accepting pain and suffering in order to bring healing to our spouse; especially when there is hurt, unfaithfulness and betrayal. Those who are obedient to the word of God are able to do this; because faithfulness to His words enables us to live by his spirit.

Since God is the binding force in a marriage it is permanent and no human organization can dissolve it (Matthew 19:4-6). Divorce therefore is rejection of the covenant (binding force), rather than its dissolution. Remarriage after divorce therefore is adultery (Luke 16:18). Furthermore, since God is the binding force in marriage rejection of it through divorce is rejection of God. Furthermore, when we a rejects his spouse through divorce He is rejecting God (Matthew 25:31-46).

Good post.

 

[Deborah13]

You are not scriptural in your statement. Re-read the text please.

 

[P31Woman]

You are not scriptural in your statement. Re-read the text please.

Who are you posting to?

 

[P31Woman]

There are two different words there in Matthew 19.9, fornication and adultery. In the heavily Jewish context of Matthew's gospel, the 'fornication' mentioned in verse 9 would seem to relate to the espousal period, before the couple came together, as in the time when Joseph, being a just man, and not wanting to make Mary a public example, was minded to put Mary away privily (before he understood about the virgin birth). This in fact seems to be the context of the Lord's 'exception clause'.

I will research that. So far I am going back to the origional question posed and what they were being taught at that time. (2 major schools of thought during that time) It appears they are asking about an actual wife.

I must leave for church in a few so I will have to come back to this later. Look forward to a great discussion.

 

[Deborah13]

Who are you posting to?

The original OP

I agree with you.

 

[bhayes]

The first paragraph is correct because it has facts. However the second paragraph is your interpretation which I don't agree with. It is not a sin to divorce but a sin to remarry. Jesus said this. Also explain to me what should a christian wife do if her husband beats her?

 

[Deborah13]

Good post.

Maybe we are reading the OP and getting a different meaning.

I do not believe that because a person gets a divorce they are rejecting God. (NO LONGER SAVED).

 

[Deborah13]

The first paragraph is correct because it has facts. However the second paragraph is your interpretation which I don't agree with. It is not a sin to divorce but a sin to remarry. Jesus said this. Also explain to me what should a christian wife do if her husband beats her?

Yep, I'd like to hear this too.

 

[P31Woman]

There are two different words there in Matthew 19.9, fornication and adultery. In the heavily Jewish context of Matthew's gospel, the 'fornication' mentioned in verse 9 would seem to relate to the espousal period, before the couple came together, as in the time when Joseph, being a just man, and not wanting to make Mary a public example, was minded to put Mary away privily (before he understood about the virgin birth). This in fact seems to be the context of the Lord's 'exception clause'.

quick question:

Do you hold that same standard for engaged couples today?

 

[farouk]

Maybe we are reading the OP and getting a different meaning.

I do not believe that because a person gets a divorce they are rejecting God. (NO LONGER SAVED).

I don't believe this, either. What I took the OP to mean was as referring to marriage as divinely instituted.

 

[farouk]

quick question:

Do you hold that same standard for engaged couples today?

Customs among gentiles and the practice among Jews are clearly distinct.

It is hard to ignore the strongly Jewish background of Matthew, however, in interpreting what Matthew does seem to be saying, in terms of the practices being referred to by the Lord Jesus.

 

[Dustoftheearth]

Not all marriages are united by love.

Some marriages are arranged marriages, some are forced, some are convenience..etc..

And if by love, then what love are we speaking?
It may be agape, but for some it may be nothing more than eros, for other it may be phileo …etc..

 

[farouk]

Not all marriages are united by love.

Some marriages are arranged marriages, some are forced, some are convenience..etc..

And if by love, then what love are we speaking?
It may be agape, but for some it may be nothing more than eros, for other it may be phileo …etc..

...but how this supposedly sheds light on what the passages referred to mean, I don't know.

 

[Deborah13]

I don't believe this, either. What I took the OP to mean was as referring to marriage as divinely instituted.

That I can agree with.

 

[Dustoftheearth]

...but how this supposedly sheds light on what the passages referred to mean, I don't know.

Hi farouk

The OP started with:

In marriage; a man and woman unite their lives in love. This love that unites them is God. God therefore becomes the binding force in their marriage; and through Him, with Him and in Him they can express His love to one another.

 

[iLOVE]

When we talk about the teachings of Jesus we must understand Jesus told us He didn't come for the dogs. Paul taught to the dogs. However both Jesus and Paul used the OT teachings. Marriage must be a 100% commitment.

 

[farouk]

As the OP looks at it, it may be true, whatever he said; but the way someone else is looking at it may have NOTHING to do with the OP perspective. It may be merely to escape intolerable abuse or being sucked dry of all one's life and energy not able to go on anymore. They may be at a point that the despair and hopelessness from ongoing pain and suffering is so great that in their desperation divorce is the only avenue of life and hope as they can see it from where they are. They may have no intention or idea of rejecting God.

...yet in our theories, which we trust we will get from Scripture itself rather than secular pragmatism, we must be careful never to theorize that divorce is supposedly divinely superior to the grace of God.