What is the cure for divorce?

[Dave Slayer]

What is the cure for divorce? What does the Bible have to say about this?

 

[Fembot]

I think you know what the Bible says about divorce, right Dave?

The cure for divorce would be for both partners to know that they are committed for life once they get married. They should abide by God's laws together, study the Bible and pray together. By putting God first (and not temptations), they will be lead in the right direction towards respecting, loving and taking care of each other.

 

[Dave Slayer]

The cure for divorce would be for both partners to know that they are committed for life once they get married. They should abide by God's laws together, study the Bible and pray together. By putting God first (and not temptations), they will be lead in the right direction towards respecting, loving and taking care of each other.

:amen

 

[jenkayben]

I think you know what the Bible says about divorce, right Dave?

The cure for divorce would be for both partners to know that they are committed for life once they get married. They should abide by God's laws together, study the Bible and pray together. By putting God first (and not temptations), they will be lead in the right direction towards respecting, loving and taking care of each other.

Fembot, are you married? Cause that is a lot easier said than done. Remember that thing they call the devil? Remember the world we live in? I know it's easy to say Lead me not into temptation but deliver me from evil but when you have friends, family and co-workers who are not christians and try to give you advice about a situation it's hard to not contemplate that advice. When your significant other does something that only a christian can forgive and others who are not christian are constantly putting it in your head that their actions are unforgivable, untolerable, and unworthy of your love it is very hard to not be led into temptation. Just my opinion.

I do think you are right in every way by what you said, it's just the "doing it" part that's hard.

 

[Fembot]

Yes, it is hard to do, for some people. The temptations of this world are very powerful. But God is the strongest. If he is the nucleus for both people, they won't go astray forever.
The problem on my part is finding someone on the same page! Or at least the same chapter

 

[jenkayben]

Yes, it is hard to do, for some people. The temptations of this world are very powerful. But God is the strongest. If he is the nucleus for both people, they won't go astray forever.
The problem on my part is finding someone on the same page! Or at least the same chapter

So do you think the answer is finding the "right" somebody according to your standards or falling in love with someone, marrying them and then making it work according to God's standards (of course as long as you aren't unequally yoked before hand)? I becamse Christian the year before we got married and so did my husband. But I think I grew faster and wanted more to please God than he did. Even throughout our marriage I so wanted the Godly husband I knew he could be, but just wouldn't because he had to please his friends, co-workers, his self, had to have the newest and latest gadget because that is what everyone knew him as and if he changed people would start asking questions. He never would speak of Jesus in front of his friends, co-workers, un-christian family. But me on the other hand wanted to have Christian friends we could both hang out with, wanted to tell everyone I knew about this wonderful Savior I found and how blessed I feel to have these burdens I've carried for so long lifted off my shoulders. I wanted to read the bible with my husband. He wanted to look at news and play games on the computer. I wanted to raise our children in a Godly way. He wanted me to raise the children in a Godly way and let him keep playing those computer games. I felt like even though we were both Christian I was more trying to please God than he was. I felt like I wanted to scream to the world that Jesus loved them and he was holding me back. So in a way I felt like the thought of God drove us apart. I could do so much more to show the world there was a God if only I didn't have my husband OR if I had a more Godly husband. And I know that sounds selfish of me and I see it now. I felt like no matter how hard I tried to live according to God's standards, my husband was not there leading the way like he should have. And I feel like I still have that resentment towards him.

So in a way I sort of feel like even though you have God in your marriage and are trying very hard to be a Godly Wife or Godly Husband, sometimes it's not enough.

 

[Fembot]

A great marriage is not when the 'perfect couple' come together. It is when an imperfect couple learns to enjoy their differences.
--Dave Meurer

But I'm not going to choose someone who is completely in a different book than me then beg him to get on the same page. You know, I am not judging anyone or anything. You shouldn't be asking me about marriage because I am not an expert nor am I married. It is my opinion that If one person decides to stop doing their part, then yes, sometimes it's not enough to make the marriage run smoothly. However...
I like the gears of a machine analogy: one wheel turns and pushes the other along... If one wheel stops, then forward movement is disturbed. But if the other wheel has a crank of it's own , it can keep trying to turn. Eventually the wheel that stopped is pushed back on course.



Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
(Proverbs 3:5,6)
[attachment=0:ynsj47ue]machinecrank.jpg[/attachment:ynsj47ue]

 

[PrimeRoot]

cure for divorce

What is the cure for divorce? What does the Bible have to say about this?

Greetings Dave.

Your thrust is a good one.

If a Christian read scripture on this for themselves AND
took it to heart as a disciple,
there would be far fewer divorces, if any.

My conviction if anyone is interested,
is that western Christians do not know what divorce is,
thus they flock to it like flies.

Cheifly, you first have to know what marriage is,
and there again, few Christians do; nor do many care.

The belief that a marriage begins on paper is not found in scripture.
The belief that divorce ends a marriage is not found in scripture.

Part of the cure for [ending] divorce is to identify and respecting several things:

1) God hates divorce.

2) Anyone who divorces their spouse is prohibited a subesequent partner by their Master.

3) Any woman who is divorced by their spouse is prohibited a subesequent partner by her Master.

3 b) Paul also claimed she is bound until death in Romans 7 and 1 Corinthians 7.

4) Even Moses merely permitted a woman to be married to a second,
but he did not say the former joining had terminated,
nor did his permission for this subequent partner find a blessing in our Masters veiw.

5) Ponder the conviction John the Baptist held, resulting in his murder.

6) Ask yourself why Tamar thought "putting her away" was worse then rape:
2nd Samuel 13, especially 1-20

7) If you can be joined to a harlot the way Adam and Eve were joined, how can divorce possibly be of any effect against the joining?

The certificate of divorce was given to a woman to re-instate her rights to do business. That purpose is ultimately devoid of meaning today.

I had a mind to discuss practical proactive measures also, but my ration of sufficient "urls" to link is spent.

Hugs and kisses
brothers and sisses.

EDIT: please note, I see no scriptural support for saying that "divorce is a sin". Certain types of subsequent marriage ARE sin however.

 

[Dave Slayer]

When does the Bible permit divorce?

 

[Fembot]

When there is adultery.

 

[follower of Christ]

What is the cure for divorce?

The cure is for people to stop thinking about marriage like its a vow or words on a piece of paper and start DOING what they SHOULD BE doing where their spouse and marriage is concerned.
When we look at marriage like its just words...either spoken or written, then thats all it is to us.
Our marriages should be ABOUT being the person we are SUPPOSED to be in our marriage and treating our spouse BETTER than we would ask them to treat us.

 

[follower of Christ]

When does the Bible permit divorce?

When the covenant is defiled by adultery or abuse.
But I dont believe even that a single case of adultery should be used to divorce.
God gave Israel a lot of patience, and while we arent God, we should be sure that we arent just looking for a reason to judge our spouse when they stumble.

Only if the show that they are going to continue breaking the covenant should we look at separation or divorce.

 

[PrimeRoot]

[quote="Dave Slayer":3j05vt00]When does the Bible permit divorce?

When the covenant is defiled by ... abuse.[/quote:3j05vt00]

Hm... Greetings

I'mmm... unaware of that specific biblical permission regarding abuse.

Again: 'I see no scriptural support for saying that "divorce is a sin"',
but our God hates divorce. And divorce often CAUSES adultery:

Although few Christians teach it,
you DO CAUSE your female partner to commit adultery,
"except" when they are already an adulteress.

Few North American prechers teach that view, I realize.
But you are still culpable,
even if the reasoning for that is not evident to you.

Separation is the only option for abuse, provided reconcilliation remains acceptable.

Grace is not permission to sin,
but the power to lay down your life sacrificially,
and unmeritted redemption from the second death.

 

[jasoncran]

one cant make his/her spouse in a marriage. some people choose sin and leave their spouse and divorce. While i believe that they should reconcile, but some people don't and they marry someone else. what do you do in that situation, stay single? My brother went through that with his x-wife, she married someoneelse and then divorce him as well, i advised my brother to take it slow and they talk to each other but there is no chance of remarriage, he has two kids by her,and their relationship is civil.

jason

 

[follower of Christ]

Hm... Greetings
I'mmm... unaware of that specific biblical permission regarding abuse.

Probably because youve started with the fallacy that Jesus or Paul actually gave a LIST of reasons for divorce...neither did.
They laid the groudwork for how marriage SHOULD be honored. They didnt give any exhaustive list of reasons why man can divorce.

Again: 'I see no scriptural support for saying that "divorce is a sin"',
but our God hates divorce. And divorce often CAUSES adultery:

And that passage is in the CONTEXT of frivolous, for EVERY cause divorce.
Lets not rip things out of the context of the WHOLE bible and ALL of the relevant data.
Thats how bad doctrines get started.

Separation is the only option for abuse, provided reconcilliation remains acceptable.

Sorry but again you are ripping scriptures out of context.
1 cor 7:10-11 has NOTHING to do with separation over abuse...YOU have added that idea.
The corinthians very clearly thought they may be being 'defiled' by unbelieving spouses and apparently were leaving the marriage without cause.
You need to READ the ENTIRE chapter, friend...


And before it comes up *I* am the author.

Does the bible permit putting away a spouse for abuse?
By WmTipton

Actually, it does seem to give grounds for 'putting away' for things like abuse, ect.
This is the passage in question;
[quote:1o4qgedv]But to the rest I say, not the Lord, if any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she consents to live with him, let him not leave her. And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified by the husband; else, then, your children are unclean, but now they are holy. But if the unbelieving one separates, let them be separated; the brother or the sister is not in bondage in such matters; but God has called us in peace. For what do you know, wife, whether you will save the husband? Or what do you know, husband, whether you will save the wife?
(1Co 7:12-16)

The passage and the context of it was an answer to the Corinthians (See 7:1 "But concerning what you wrote to me") about being able to leave if they were saved and the spouse was not.
They felt that they were 'defiled' in being with this person in the marriage based on other teachings about 'touching no unclean thing' and related passages.
This is why Paul tells them that their children are clean and that their spouse is 'sanctified' (not in a SAVED sense, but just to ease their minds so they didnt divorce) by the saved spouse (1Co 7:14).
These believers were assuming they could just up and leave their existing marriages if they became saved and their spouse had not.
Paul is only showing there that they are not to leave if the unsaved spouse is happy to remain with them in the marriage...dont just divorce them because they are unsaved...we may be instrumental in bringing them to salvation.
But Pauls statement IS conditional. If the unbelieving spouse is abusive we DO have right to leave that marriage...ie 'divorce'...which is what LEAVING the marriage is...we would be in the very same 'agamos' state that the woman in 1 Cor 7:10-11 would be...UNmarried.

But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
(1Co 7:12-13)

The wording there clearly shows that if she is 'pleased' then let him not put her away.
This statement is conditional.

"if"
G1487
ei i
a primary particle of conditionality;
if, whether, that, etc.:--forasmuch as, if, that, (al-)though, whether. Often
used in connection or composition with other particles, especially as in
G1489, G1490, G1499, G1508, G1509, G1512, G1513, G1536, G1537. See
also G1437.

It doesnt not simply state 'let him not put her away' but adds the condition of being 'pleased' to his not putting her away.
If this were an absolute statement, that he not put her away then it should be stated as such, but its not. A condition is very apparent in the actual text.


So what does this word 'pleased' mean?

G4909
1) to be pleased together with, to approve together (with others)
2) to be pleased at the same time with, consent, agree to
2a) to applaud

the word clearly shows a mutually pleasant experience.
She is pleased along with him...at the same time....'together'.
If one spouse is being beaten, they would hardly be "pleased together with" the person who is beating them....so why does Paul show the condition of mutual pleasing if there is no condition at all ?

In taking the actual greek into account, we clearly see a condition added to Pauls stating that this man not 'put away' his wife. The condition being that the marriage is pleasing mutually... the greek does not show a one sided thing at all.
Paul then shows the same thing in reverse for the believing wife in this situation....

And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
(1Co 7:13)

"leave him" there is the same as 'put away' in the previous verse.

G863
aphie?mi
Thayer Definition:
1) to send away
1a) to bid going away or depart
1a1) of a husband divorcing his wife
1b) to send forth, yield up, to expire
1c) to let go, let alone, let be
1c1) to disregard
1c2) to leave, not to discuss now, (a topic)
1c2a) of teachers, writers and speakers
1c3) to omit, neglect
1d) to let go, give up a debt, forgive, to remit
1e) to give up, keep no longer
2) to permit, allow, not to hinder, to give up a thing to a person
3) to leave, go way from one
3a) in order to go to another place
3b) to depart from any one
3c) to depart from one and leave him to himself so that all mutual claims are abandoned
3d) to desert wrongfully
3e) to go away leaving something behind
3f) to leave one by not taking him as a companion
3g) to leave on dying, leave behind one
3h) to leave so that what is left may remain, leave remaining
3i) abandon, leave destitute

The context of 'divorce' as a whole in scripture is either the casting out of a spouse or the leaving of a marriage with the intent of 'putting away' that marriage (altho there are some who try to pretend the two are not the same intent)

For a bit of proof that this is consistently the case, we jump back up to verse 7:11 and see that this woman who has departed her marriage is deemed 'unmarried' by Paul....Agamos/single/unwed/ARAMOC

G22
agamos
Thayer Definition:
1) unmarried, unwedded, single

I think the greek makes it very clear that in a situation where a believer is married to an unbeliever who is abusing them that the condition above that Paul presents does give 'grounds' for divorcing the spouse (leaving the marriage)

Pauls condition of if it is "pleased" (meaning mutually) is the 'grounds' for putting away this spouse if they are abusing and its not pleasing.
The "leaving" of the believer would cause them to be "agamos" or unwed/single/unmarried according to Paul thus showing that they are quite divorced when they left with that intent.

In a case of two believers tho, there is a call to reconcile or remain unmarried.
Of course, some folks move on because they no longer wish to be abused and it is very easily argued that if a man can continually and repeatedly batter his wife then he is not showing evidence of actually being a believer/follower of Christ based on the fact that CHRIST shows that we will know men by their fruits.

Those in Corinth were putting away a spouse when they became born again, even if the marriage was otherwise fine.
Paul tells them in this passage to not end their marriages simply because they found Christ and their spouse had not.
If the marriage is ok otherwise, if it is ‘pleased’...then do not put away this spouse but stay with them because the believers influence might be used to bring salvation to this person.

The conditional statement made by Paul clearly shows that there might be a situation whereby the believer may put away this spouse.
If the marriage is abusive it is hardly mutually ‘pleased’ and as such the condition is not being met as presented by Paul.

Regardless of what some teach, there ARE conditions whereby divorce is permissible and as such is not ‘sin’ for the one carrying the divorce out. Just as we know the Lord God did not ‘sin’ against an adulterous Israel when He gave her a bill of divorce.
[/quote:1o4qgedv]

 

[follower of Christ]

one cant make his/her spouse in a marriage. some people choose sin and leave their spouse and divorce. While i believe that they should reconcile, but some people don't and they marry someone else. what do you do in that situation, stay single?

Depends on the person.
If one can remain celibate, thats a good choice.
If not, they can remarry if reconciliation isnt possible.

My brother went through that with his x-wife, she married someoneelse and then divorce him as well, i advised my brother to take it slow and they talk to each other but there is no chance of remarriage, he has two kids by her,and their relationship is civil.

jason

No chance of reconcilation, you mean ?
He is allowed to remarry if they are divorced.
It is a complete MISunderstanding of Jesus and Pauls words to claim that they are forbidding remarriage.
The POINT of both men is to stop FRIVOLOUS divorce and remarriage as the Jews and probably even the Corinthians were guilty of.

 

[jasoncran]

one cant make his/her spouse in a marriage. some people choose sin and leave their spouse and divorce. While i believe that they should reconcile, but some people don't and they marry someone else. what do you do in that situation, stay single?

Depends on the person.
If one can remain celibate, thats a good choice.
If not, they can remarry if reconciliation isnt possible.

My brother went through that with his x-wife, she married someoneelse and then divorce him as well, i advised my brother to take it slow and they talk to each other but there is no chance of remarriage, he has two kids by her,and their relationship is civil.

jason

No chance of reconcilation, you mean ?
He is allowed to remarry if they are divorced.
It is a complete MISunderstanding of Jesus and Pauls words to claim that they are forbidding remarriage.
The POINT of both men is to stop FRIVOLOUS divorce and remarriage as the Jews and probably even the Corinthians were guilty of.

as far as i know there's no chance of reconcilation, my brother did want to remmarry his x-wife if the lord lead them in that direction,but i recall that the x-wife wasn't interested

jason

 

[allyn]

The response of the Bible on the issue of divorce is fairly obvious.

Personally, i think the cure for divorce is constant communication. It's when partners do not communicate with each other about actions that tick them off that destroys the marriage.

 

[PrimeRoot]

I'mmm... unaware of that specific biblical permission regarding abuse.

Probably because youve started with the fallacy that Jesus or Paul actually gave a LIST of reasons for divorce...neither did.

Neither needed to if the aduteress was dead.

My goal is SOLEY
to encourage folks to open scripture,
and not to foist my "fallacies" on anyone.

I feel like I hear you saying, after reading
your exhastive explanation about non-believers,
that Jesus mis-spoke when he gave the sole
"reason of unchastity"
for defensible divorce.

Perhaps Absalom had a better solution to widow his sister Tamar.
Perhaps David was faster on the draw than Amnon.
Same result tho: no divorce required in either case.

- Uriah
( PR )

 

[follower of Christ]

I feel like I hear you saying, after reading
your exhastive explanation about non-believers,
that Jesus mis-spoke when he gave the sole
"reason of unchastity"
for defensible divorce.

Which is YOUR interpretation of Jesus intent.
*IF* what Jesus says in a few verses in the gospels were ALL the evidence there was, then you may have a case. But it isnt. And I know that it isnt because Ive spent over 6000 hours now on this topic of marriage from Gods word.
Jesus didnt mis-speak anything. YOU are MIS-understanding the intent, thats all.

My goal is SOLEY
to encourage folks to open scripture,
and not to foist my "fallacies" on anyone.

Anyone can open a bible, read three verses and conclude anything, Im afraid.

Heres an example.
Im going to ask you for $500.
Now Im going to give you the PLAIN words of your Lord Jesus and Im going to expect you to OBEY the CLEAR instruction....

(Luk 6:30 KJV) Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

(Mat 5:42 KJV) Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Now, please dont DO what you wont allow US to do....run to some other passage to get you out of this obligation Christ has put on you to GIVE to EVERY man who asks....NO exception provided.

As I see it you have two options.
1. Practice the legalism youve preached here...ie taking the EXACT letter and obeying TO the letter...ie sending me a check for $500
or;
2. Looking at the REST of scripture to see if Jesus ACTUALLY meant that we are to give to someone who just demands something of us without actually looking to see if there is legitimate need first.

There is no way out of this for you *IF* you wish to play the legalist and demand adherence to the letter of Jesus' words without understanding context from the WHOLE word of God.

I await either my check or your reasoning for not sending it.
I'll accept either, but rest assured if you arent going to ante up its going to completely destroy your argument above...ie not paying up means you seemingly believe Jesus 'misspoke', as I believe you put it...the very sort of thing you apparently feel to correct me on.

God bless