Marriage?

[farouk]

Edward, my dad being a divorcee from my mother (obviously) sought this out biblically and struggled with this as well. He is the Director of our local Divorce Care and biblically, you are free to remarry. He strongly suggests a book "Divorce and Remarriage in the Church" by David Instone - Brewer and you can look at it briefly here: http://www.instonebrewer.com/divorceremarriage/

I hope this is a blessing for you and the questions you have.

Ryan: Feel free to quote what Scriptures you mean. The link refers to adultery rather than fornication as the exception clause; I think this must be a misquotation.

 

[reba]

G4202

From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.

Feminine of G4205; a strumpet; figuratively an idolater: - harlot, whore.


I don't see the meaning of the 2 words, fornication /adultery different. My English grammar is lousy, I have no idea about Greek, these descriptions are from Strong's

 

[farouk]

G4202

From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.

Feminine of G4205; a strumpet; figuratively an idolater: - harlot, whore.


I don't see the meaning of the 2 words, fornication /adultery different. My English grammar is lousy, I have no idea about Greek, these descriptions are from Strong's

reba:

But where the same verse uses both words, a distinction in emphasis and meaning is to be expected. As in Matthew 5.32. We need to look at the context and the Jewish background also.

Blessings.

 

[Agape]

I've been told that John McArthur's site has some good teachings on this subject.

Here ;) http://www.gty.org/resources/search/divorce and remarriage

 

[reba]

Maybe from a grammar standpoint but common sense tells me the 'act' is the same... The difference is the state, married/not married, of the person committing the act..

 

[farouk]

Here ;) http://www.gty.org/resources/search/divorce%20and%20remarriage

Agape: I just taken a look at some of this. I have a high regard for the ministry of John MacArthur, Jr. Here, he seems to be making some assumptions which are not warranted: he supposes that in the Matthew 5 passage that the fornication referred to is actually the adultery that happens after the couple have come together, whereas the word used is fornication, the word being distinct from the adultery also used in the same verse.

So of course this brings a hypothetical problem. What about the sin of divorce and remarriage referred to in the second part of Matthew 5.32? What does it refer to? MacArthur then has to add the sense: oh, it means that if someone unbiblically divorced, rather than divorced, remarries.

 

[farouk]

Maybe from a grammar standpoint but common sense tells me the 'act' is the same... The difference is the state, married/not married, of the person committing the act..

reba: It's also about when.

Under Jewish custom, it was called fornication still if the person, betrothed, committed the act before the couple came together. Therefore the Matthew 5.32 passage is not giving adultery as the exception clause, but fornication. Joseph's initial reaction, before he understood about the Virgin Birth, was to put her away not because of any adultery exception clause, but because of the specifically fornication issue during the Jewish betrothal period.

Blessings.

 

[reba]

reba: It's also about when.

Under Jewish custom, it was called fornication still if the person, betrothed, committed the act before the couple came together. Therefore the Matthew 5.32 passage is not giving adultery as the exception clause, but fornication. Joseph's initial reaction, before he understood about the Virgin Birth, was to put her away not because of any adultery exception clause, but because of the specifically fornication issue during the Jewish betrothal period.

Blessings.

I am not seeing any conflict ?....She and Joseph had not consummated the marriage so it would have been fornication.

 

[Ryan]

Ryan: Feel free to quote what Scriptures you mean. The link refers to adultery rather than fornication as the exception clause; I think this must be a misquotation.

I was talking with my dad over the phone about it. He referenced Deuteronomy 24 as that is what the passage Jesus was referring to in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. As divorce is quite complicated, so are the teachings on divorce complicated. That is why my dad recommended that book for Edward, as one thread or post could not possibly tie all the relevant verses necessary to gain a full understanding of such. But to possibly quote a few verses from the NT without tying them to OT teachings, one is selling themselves short.

One thing I did glean though is that God was a divorcee from his people.

Jeremiah 3:8 "<SUP> </SUP>And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and <SUP class=crossreference value='(P)'></SUP>given her a writ of divorce, yet her <SUP class=crossreference value='(Q)'></SUP>treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also."

 

[farouk]

I am not seeing any conflict ?....She and Joseph had not consummated the marriage so it would have been fornication.

Well, exactly,

This is what Matthew 5.32 seems to be about, in reference to the fornication exception clause.

So to try to use Matthew 5.32 to make 'fornication' seem to mean 'adultery' (different context) instead, would seem unwarranted.

Blessings.

 

[reba]

Well I disagree and I am older then you so I am right! I will drop this Faruok, this is Ed's thread so to speak... Maybe in a less personal thread some time...

 

[Ryan]

I was talking with my dad over the phone about it. He referenced Deuteronomy 24 as that is what the passage Jesus was referring to in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. As divorce is quite complicated, so are the teachings on divorce complicated. That is why my dad recommended that book for Edward, as one thread or post could not possibly tie all the relevant verses necessary to gain a full understanding of such. But to possibly quote a few verses from the NT without tying them to OT teachings, one is selling themselves short.

One thing I did glean though is that God was a divorcee from his people.

Jeremiah 3:8 "<SUP> </SUP>And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and <SUP class=crossreference value='(P)'></SUP>given her a writ of divorce, yet her <SUP class=crossreference value='(Q)'></SUP>treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also."

As well, why write a writ of divorcement? If one was never to legally marry again under God's eyes, why the writ of divorcement? Could one just separate, and never to marry again? I believe the writ was there to prove to a prospective spouse to ensure they were legally divorced for just cause, so that the new spouse wouldn't be committing adultery. My thinking anyways and thinking out loud. If not, what was the point of the writ then?

 

[farouk]

I was talking with my dad over the phone about it. He referenced Deuteronomy 24 as that is what the passage Jesus was referring to in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. As divorce is quite complicated, so are the teachings on divorce complicated. That is why my dad recommended that book for Edward, as one thread or post could not possibly tie all the relevant verses necessary to gain a full understanding of such. But to possibly quote a few verses from the NT without tying them to OT teachings, one is selling themselves short.

One thing I did glean though is that God was a divorcee from his people.

Jeremiah 3:8 "And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and <sup class="crossreference" value="(P)"></sup>given her a writ of divorce, yet her <sup class="crossreference" value="(Q)"></sup>treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also."

Ryan: Okay, so Deuteronomy 24. This passage doesn't specify what it was that the woman who husband didn't want to consummate his marriage is supposed to have done. It's hard to argue that this is a case of adultery (i.e., post marital activity) leading to divorce.

Old Testament passages such as in Hosea point to the prophet commanded to marry an unfaithful woman, and thus God teaches Hosea the lesson of His loving, great patience towards an erring Israel.

Old Testament passages such as in Malachi teach very strongly that the Lord 'hateth putting away' (Malachi 2.16).

 

[farouk]

Well I disagree and I am older then you so I am right! I will drop this Faruok, this is Ed's thread so to speak... Maybe in a less personal thread some time...

reba: Not trying to make this personal at all; simply an examination of the relevant Scriptures, and we are managing to avoid the use of extravagant language, I think.

Blessings.

 

[Ryan]

Ryan: Okay, so Deuteronomy 24. This passage doesn't specify what it was that the woman who husband didn't want to consummate his marriage is supposed to have done. It's hard to argue that this is a case of adultery (i.e., post marital activity) leading to divorce.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4 "“When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some <SUP class=crossreference value='(A)'></SUP>indecency in her, and <SUP class=crossreference value='(B)'></SUP>he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, <SUP class=versenum>2 </SUP>and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife, <SUP class=versenum>3 </SUP>and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, <SUP class=versenum>4 </SUP>then her <SUP class=crossreference value='(C)'></SUP>former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the Lord, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance"

I think what this passage says is what it doesn't say. God specifically says your ex-wife whom he gave the divorcement to in the first place for her indecency. He cannot marry the first wife again. But it doesn't say the divorcer could never marry again, only the first wife because she has been defiled. If it was an abomination for Edward to re-marry again and a sin, it would say it very clearly in scriptures.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

reba: It's also about when.

Under Jewish custom, it was called fornication still if the person, betrothed, committed the act before the couple came together. Therefore the Matthew 5.32 passage is not giving adultery as the exception clause, but fornication. Joseph's initial reaction, before he understood about the Virgin Birth, was to put her away not because of any adultery exception clause, but because of the specifically fornication issue during the Jewish betrothal period.

Blessings.

Not wishing to extend a discussion that is basically suspended, but porneia is the word translated "unchastisty" and means both adultery and fornication. It also means any kind of illicit sexual behavior, depending on its context, such as same-sex encounters, bestiality, incest, or sexual encounters with divorced persons. Metaphorically, it means idolatry, which is why it is applicable spiritually, as any of these things represents an idol someone can place between him/herself and God.

 

[Edward]

Good evening. Lots of talk while I was at work I see. Very good, lots to think about. I'm going to check that book out and read over everything you all were talking about. don't let me interrupt the conversation as it feeds me thought provoking material. ;)

Let me see if I have this straight though. Fornication is relations outside of marriage? Adultery is relations outside of the marriage bond? Idolatry is covetousness? Do I have those terms correct?

 

[King James]

Matthew 19:9
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

I got you covered with one verse. She had sex outside the marriage. That is fornication. See 1 Cor. 5:1; Amos 7:17; Ezek. 16:8,15,26,29; Jer. 3:6,8 .

You are free to get married again.

 

[farouk]

Good evening. Lots of talk while I was at work I see. Very good, lots to think about. I'm going to check that book out and read over everything you all were talking about. don't let me interrupt the conversation as it feeds me thought provoking material. ;)

Let me see if I have this straight though. Fornication is relations outside of marriage? Adultery is relations outside of the marriage bond? Idolatry is covetousness? Do I have those terms correct?

Edward:

What you say, sounds good.

Blessings.

 

[farouk]

PS: Maybe I should bow out of the discussion, like reba did; I guess I've already said all I've got to say.

Blessings.