I misled us on the issue of divorce - wrong interpretation

[Jethro Bodine]

Could the passage possibly be referring to a marriage where one is a believer and one isn't?

Yes. But Paul seems to be implying that only an unbeliever would leave a marriage. Surely even genuine Christians foolishly leave marriages (1 Corinthians 7:11 NASB), but I see what Paul is driving at in his counsel about letting the 'unbelieving' spouse leave.

And in the case of a believing spouse.... what happens?

Honestly, according to our Matthew 18:17 discussion, the departing spouse is to be considered/treated like an unbeliever because they have decided that there will be no reconciliation, ever. Let's remember, we're talking in the context of a spouse who simply wants to leave for the sake of leaving, not because of special circumstances.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Yes. But Paul seems to be implying that only an unbeliever would leave a marriage. Surely even genuine Christians foolishly leave marriages (1 Corinthians 7:11 NASB), but I see what Paul is driving at in his counsel about letting the 'unbelieving' spouse leave.


Honestly, according to our Matthew 18:17 discussion, the departing spouse is to be considered/treated like an unbeliever because they have decided that there will be no reconciliation, ever. Let's remember, we're talking in the context of a spouse who simply wants to leave for the sake of leaving, not because of special circumstances.

True.
But in the case of an abusive spouse, let me mention that they're not going to want to leave. Someone who "grooms" someone, marries them, and begins abusing them after that, they're not worried about leaving. They make their victims feel obligated to stay, most often. They play mind games.
(Just to be clear, this time this isn't me self referencing. My parents' case falls squarely within Biblical guidelines. But I know the kind of situation I'm mentioning here does happen.)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I would support divorce in the case of spousal abuse

Why? So a person can remarry?
Why isn't just separating a good answer?
I'm not coming down on you. I'm making you see why we humans can only think of non-marriage in terms of nothing less than divorce. The powerful impulse to be married is what makes the simple counsel of scripture to not divorce except for reason of fornication or abandonment so hard to accept.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

True.
But in the case of an abusive spouse, let me mention that they're not going to want to leave. Someone who "grooms" someone, marries them, and begins abusing them after that, they're not worried about leaving. They make their victims feel obligated to stay, most often. They play mind games.

Actually, when an abuser realizes he can't control and abuse his victim he wants nothing more than to discard them.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Why? So a person can remarry?
Why isn't just separating a good answer?
I'm not coming down on you. I'm making you see why we humans can only think of non-marriage in terms of nothing less than divorce. The powerful impulse to be married is what makes the simple counsel of scripture to not divorce except for reason of fornication or abandonment so hard to accept.

Because being bound to someone who clearly doesn't give two penny's for your feelings or best interest is cruel. I'm talking about extreme cases of abuse, where reconciliation is not possible.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Actually, when an abuser realizes he can't control and abuse his victim he wants nothing more than to discard them.

edit: wait misunderstood hold on

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Because being bound to someone who clearly doesn't give two penny's for your feelings or best interest is cruel. I'm talking about extreme cases of abuse, where reconciliation is not possible.

I get that. But why does divorce have to be the answer to a dangerous marriage and not just separation? I'm suggesting it's because we humans simply can't accept not being happily married. We seek divorce in such circumstances in order to be remarried, not just to get away from unfair abuse. I say that because if it was just about not being abused anymore separation would be a sufficient answer to the problem, and would preserver God's counsel to not divorce.

 

[evenifigoalone]

If what you're saying is that a victim of spousal abuse can separate, and let the abuser move on (commit adultery) since they're going to be inclined to this anyway, that I can get behind.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If what you're saying is that a victim of spousal abuse can separate, and let the abuser move on (commit adultery) since they're going to be inclined to this anyway, that I can get behind.

That's really what I'm saying.
Create circumstances that help the abuser set you free. Don't let the abuser drive you to break God's command concerning marriage.

 

[OzSpen]

Actually, when an abuser realizes he can't control and abuse his victim he wants nothing more than to discard them.

That's not my experience in 34 years of marriage, family and youth counselling. The abuser often wants to continue the controlling behaviour with emotional, verbal and/or physical abuse. Have you ever had to deal with counselling a distraught woman and her children who have been verbally abused on the phone or on the street by an abuser?

I have, many times over, and it's not a pretty sight to try to help such a woman and children stop the abusive behaviour towards them and work through the impact of abuse on a person. Post-traumatic stress applies to women and children who are victims of abusive relationships, and not just to Vietnam vets.

Oz

 

[evenifigoalone]

I get that. But why does divorce have to be the answer to a dangerous marriage and not just separation? I'm suggesting it's because we humans simply can't accept not being happily married. We seek divorce in such circumstances in order to be remarried, not just to get away from unfair abuse. I say that because if it was just about not being abused anymore separation would be a sufficient answer to the problem, and would preserver God's counsel to not divorce.

Well the Bible does say some people should be married in order to keep themselves out of temptation. (Or at least that is the common interpretation of I Cor. 7.) So that, or just wanting to be happily married.
Or they might want to remarry for the sake of their children, if there are any.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

That's not my experience in 34 years of marriage, family and youth counselling. The abuser often wants to continue the controlling behaviour with emotional, verbal and/or physical abuse. Have you ever had to deal with counselling a distraught woman and her children who have been verbally abused on the phone or on the street by an abuser?

I have, many times over, and it's not a pretty sight to try to help such a woman and children stop the abusive behaviour towards them and work through the impact of abuse on a person. Post-traumatic stress applies to women and children who are victims of abusive relationships, and not just to Vietnam vets.

Oz

I left out of my post that the discarding of the victim that can't be controlled anymore is often not pretty, even violent. But the truth is, sooner or later, the abuser who can't control and abuse his victim anymore will seek to end the relationship altogether. I'm confident the wall that has to be erected between an abuser and his victim(s) that drives him to do that may have to include restraining orders, etc.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Well the Bible does say some people should be married in order to keep themselves out of temptation.

Yes, I've been politely saying people want to have sex, no matter what. That's why it's very hard for humans to accept God's counsel to not divorce, particularly in the case of the marriage where there is no sexual satisfaction because of abuse, but no adultery or abandonment has occurred. If that were not true then physical separation instead of divorce would be a satisfactory Biblical answer to the problem of an abusive spouse. But as it is, the desire for sexual intimacy drives us humans to think of ways to get around God's counsel to only divorce in cases of fornication or abandonment.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Yes, I've been politely saying people want to have sex, no matter what. That's why it's very hard for humans to accept God's counsel to not divorce, particularly in the case of the marriage where there is no sexual satisfaction because of abuse.

It is a strong instinct, for most people. I would argue that not necessarily in all cases, though, but then I've been hanging out with the asexual crowd a lot and they make up like 1% of the population....still, that's one in every hundred people or so, so among billions of people that's quite a few. Even though they don't want sexual relationships, they often still want romantic ones, marriage, etc.
(I tend to think probably a lot of people could choose to live without it even if it's something they desire, but then I'm self referencing there.)

 

[OzSpen]

Not sure what your thoughts are but I beleive forgiveness is the essential point for the start of the journey.

Theologian Lewis Smedes writes, "To forgive is to set a prisoner free and discover that the prisoner was you.

Never forget the three powerful resources you always have available to you: love, prayer, and forgiveness. (H. Jackson Brown, Jr.)

When you forgive, you in no way change the past - but you sure do change the future. (Bernard Meltzer)

Thanks for your encouragement

I should have said more than I did in #49 when I wrote, 'I would never say, "'Forgive and move on". I was particularly referring to a trite, 'Forgive and move on', in counselling. I've heard of too many pastors who use this approach but are not engaged with the person in practical steps of help and the healing process.

To forgive involves laying down our rights to get even with the other person - even if that means trying to get even with the person in our thoughts. We can only do this with God as our helper, remembering what Jesus said in the Lord's prayer, 'Forgive us our sins, as we have forgiven those who sin against us' (Matt 6:12 NLT).

To obtain true liberty in Christ from our past, we need to forgive those who have sinned against us, but in counselling I deal with the current issues including the hurt being experienced. A glib, 'Forgive your abuser', is not the starting point. It is the mid or finishing point, but sometimes it takes people a while to get there.

You need to understand that a large chunk of my counselling has been in working with non-Christians in Christian-based agencies. Many don't have a clue who God is, so starting way before God's forgiveness is necessary for them.

In Christ,
Oz

 

[OzSpen]

If what you're saying is that a victim of spousal abuse can separate, and let the abuser move on (commit adultery) since they're going to be inclined to this anyway, that I can get behind.

To whom are you responding? Please learn to back quote so that we know the content of the post to which you are replying?

For the safety of the abused spouses, they often need to separate for their personal well-being. It is not to encourage the abuser to commit adultery but to save the spouse (and children) from further abuse.

 

[evenifigoalone]

To whom are you responding? Please learn to back quote so that we know the content of the post to which you are replying?

For the safety of the abused spouses, they often need to separate for their personal well-being. It is not to encourage the abuser to commit adultery but to save the spouse (and children) from further abuse.

I was responding to this:

Actually, when an abuser realizes he can't control and abuse his victim he wants nothing more than to discard them.

It was a revision of this post:

edit: wait misunderstood hold on

At the time it seemed like making a new post was better than editing the old one, since the old one had likely been viewed already.

 

[OzSpen]

I left out of my post that the discarding of the victim that can't be controlled anymore is often not pretty, even violent. But the truth is, sooner or later, the abuser who can't control and abuse his victim anymore will seek to end the relationship altogether. I'm confident the wall that has to be erected between an abuser and his victim(s) that drives him to do that may have to include restraining orders, etc.

Restraining orders are often part of the solution. But helping the abused overcome the emotional trauma of what has happened and often continues to happen, is one of the challenging issues for clients and counsellors. I thank God for safe houses that are available through DV services in my country. They have saved many a female spouse and her children from further abuse.

We should be seeing in this thread that the 2 biblical issues that make divorce possible have other tentacles that make these 2 options challenging for the counsellor and/or pastor.

Oz

 

[evenifigoalone]

I know that the safe house where I live, there is no record of the address and if you drive there you have to stop a way's from it so no one but the people staying there know. It's to keep the abusive spouse from finding them.

To me it seems that adultery and abuse are pretty related, in that they both display a lack of concern and care.

 

[OzSpen]

I know that the safe house where I live, there is no record of the address and if you drive there you have to stop a way's from it so no one but the people staying there know. It's to keep the abusive spouse from finding them.

To me it seems that adultery and abuse are pretty related, in that they both display a lack of concern and care.

My many years of counselling tell me there is some relationship between adultery and abuse. However, the bigger issue is controlling behaviour by the abuser and that can involve sexual abuse of the victim. Blokes who want to control partners through domination is the biggest issue.

I have led groups for perpetrators of abuse, so I know the issues they deal with that I'm not going to share here because of confidentiality. All I say is that blokes know multiple ways to get what they want through abusing a partner.

Oz