Divorce and Remarriage - Part 3

[Abiding in His Word]

The Law of Moses

It is not until we come to the third book of the Bible that we find divorce and remarriage specifically mentioned. Contained within the Law of Moses was a prohibition against priests marrying divorced women:

They shall not take a woman who is profaned by harlotry, nor shall they take a woman divorced from her husband; for he is holy to his God (Lev. 21:7).

Nowhere within the Law of Moses is there such a prohibition addressed to the general population of Israelite men. Moreover, the just-quoted verse implies (1) that there were divorced Israelite women and (2) that there would be nothing wrong with non-priestly Israelite men marrying women who had been previously married. The above-quoted law applies only to priests and divorced women who might marry priests. There was nothing wrong under the Law of Moses with any divorced woman remarrying, just as long as she didn't marry a priest. And there was nothing wrong with any man, other than a priest, marrying a divorced woman.

The high priest (perhaps as a supreme type of Christ) was required to live by even higher standards than regular priests. He was not even permitted to marry a widow . We read just a few verses later in Leviticus:

A widow, or a divorced woman, or one who is profaned by harlotry, these he may not take; but rather he is to marry a virgin of his own people (Lev. 21:14).

Does this verse prove that it was sinful for any and all Israelite widows to ever remarry or that it was sinful for any and all Israelite men to marry widows? No, certainly not. In fact this verse strongly implies that it would not be sinful for any widow to marry any man as long as he wasn't the high priest. And it strongly implies that any man besides a high priest was permitted to marry a widow. Other scriptures affirm the complete legitimacy of widows remarrying (see Rom. 7:2-3; 1 Tim.5:14).

This verse also implies, along with the previous verse we considered (Lev. 21:7), that that there would be nothing wrong for any Israelite man (other than a priest or high priest) to marry a divorced woman or even a woman who was not a virgin, "profaned by harlotry." It likewise implies that, under the Law of Moses, there was nothing wrong for a divorced woman to remarry or for a woman "profaned by harlotry" to marry, just as long as she didn't marry a priest. God graciously gave both fornicators and divorcees another chance, even though He was very opposed to both fornication and divorce.

A Second Specific Prohibition Against Remarriage

How many "second chances" did God give divorced women? Should we conclude that God gave divorced women just one more chance under the Law of Moses, permitting just one remarriage? That would be a wrong conclusion. We read later in the Law of Moses,

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 indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man's wife, 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, then her 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 (Deut. 24:1-4).

Note that, in these verses, the sole prohibition was against the twice-divorced woman (or once-divorced once-widowed woman) remarrying her first husband. Nothing is said about her incurring guilt for remarrying the second time. And once she was divorced the second time (or widowed from her second husband), she was only prohibited from going back to her first husband. The clear implication is that she would be free to remarry any other man (who is willing to take the chance on her). If it were a sin for her to remarry anyone else, then there would have been no need for God to give this kind of specific instructions. All he would have had to say was, "Divorced people are forbidden to remarry."

Moreover, if God permitted this woman to marry a second time, then the man who married her after her first divorce could not have been incurring guilt either. And if she was permitted to be married a third time, then any man who married her after she was twice divorced would not be sinning (unless he had been her first husband). So the God who hated divorce loved divorced people, and He mercifully offered them another chance.
--------------------------------------

See Divorce and Remarriage Part 4

[savedbygrace]

Thank you for this scripture, Abiding, and for your commentary on this issue, it is a sensitive topic in many people's lives and this is encouraging to people like myself who constantly wonder if I am guilty before God because I am divorced, or whether I am even free to re-marry. I know many others who have these same things in the back of their minds, and this is comforting to those of us who had no other option. This is a subject that has split many churches over the years and still remains a divisive issue for many. Bless you for sharing this,

SBG

[daffodyllady]

Abiding, I just thought you would like to know how Young's literal translation of the Bible renders Deuteronomy 24:1-3.

#1.When a man doth take a wife, and hath married her,
and it hath been, if she doth not find grace in his eyes,
(for he hath found in her nakedness of anything,)
and he hath written for her a writing of divorcement,
and given it into her hand,
and sent her out of his house,

#2. And she hath gone out of his house,
and hath gone and been another man's,

#3. And the latter man hath hated her,
and written for her a writing of divorce,
And given it into her hand, and sent her out of his house,
or when the latter man dieth, who hath taken her to himself for wife,

#4. Her former husband, who sent her away, is not able to turn back
to take her to be for him a wife,
after that she hath become defiled;
for an abomination it is before Jehovah,
and thou dost not cause the land to sin,
which Jehovah thy God is giving to thee--an inheritance.

I found this to be very interesting and informative.
Notice that the focus of the commandment was not a permission to divorce. In fact, such permission is not given at all. Rather, verses 1-3 are all in past tense. They are simply setting the background for the commandment given in verse 4.

And Jesus corrected the view of the Pharisees toward this passage. It held no permission to divorce at all.

All it held, was a recognition that some people were in fact divorced and remarried.

BUT

In Mark 10, Jesus told the Pharisees that in fact, from the time of the beginning, God never allowed for divorce. Instead, he said that God did the joining, and if anyone put away their spouse, and married another... they were committing adultery against their former spouse.

Adultery. How can God say you are committing adultery against one you are no longer married to? Unless in fact, God says you are still married in HIS book!

In the Old Testament, God winked at remarriage. But now, He commands all men everywhere to repent.

[daffodyllady]

There are many victims of the sins of others. Divorce is no different. And some women are separated from abusive husbands. Sometimes, divorce just happens to a person.

It happened to me. I had no choice in the matter.

However, I have the choice whether I will obey God in the matter of remarriage.

He forbids it. Period.

[Abiding in His Word]

I found this to be very interesting and informative.
Notice that the focus of the commandment was not a permission to divorce. In fact, such permission is not given at all. Rather, verses 1-3 are all in past tense. They are simply setting the background for the commandment given in verse 4.

And Jesus corrected the view of the Pharisees toward this passage. It held no permission to divorce at all.

All it held, was a recognition that some people were in fact divorced and remarried.

What do you think the purpose of the certificate of divorce was?

BUT

In Mark 10, Jesus told the Pharisees that in fact, from the time of the beginning, God never allowed for divorce.

Well....almost. What Jesus was saying was that from the beginning it was God's design for marriage for the husband to cleave to his wife - as opposed to putting her away as had become the practice of the Pharisees.

So it would be more correct to say that "God never wanted divorce." But while He never wanted divorce, He did allow it because of men's hard hearts and as we know, even divorced Israel & Judah because of their unfaithfullness. Again, it's the sin that causes the divorce that God hates.

Instead, he said that God did the joining, and if anyone put away their spouse, and married another... they were committing adultery against their former spouse.

Correct... kinda. You are combining two different verses I think.

Mark 10:9 "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."

This indeed is a rebuke against those who were desireous of putting away their wives for any cause.

Mar 10:11 And He *said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; Mar 10:12 and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."

The woman who was "put away" and married another, in turn divorces him to marry another. This is obvious by the words "she herself." This again is in the context of the Pharisees question to Jesus trying to justify putting away their wives for any reason other than unfaithfulness as permitted by the Mosaic law. They are indeed stern words against partner swapping which was perpetuated as a legal practice throughout the OT and evidently into the NT.

In the Old Testament, God winked at remarriage. But now, He commands all men everywhere to repent.

Absolutely we are not in the times of ignorance and God does require sinners to repent. But scripture does not refer to God winking at remarriage. Paul was speaking to previous ignorance about idol worship.

Act 17:16 Now while Paul was waiting for them at Athens, his spirit was being provoked within him as he was observing the city full of idols.

Paul does speak of remarriage as permissable.

Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you. 1Cor 7:27-28

A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. Cor 7:39

But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away. 1Cor 7:12-13

In this admonition, Paul seems to place the future of the marriage on the willingness of the believer to say with the unbeliever. This marriage would evidently not be one where God joined the two together nor was it sanctioned by Him as the best for the believing partner.

I think I see a similar situation in the book of Ezra where God's people had married unbelieving foreign women and felt convicted to send them away.

Then Shecaniah son of Jehiel, one of the descendants of Elam, said to Ezra, "We have been unfaithful to our God by marrying foreign women from the peoples around us. But in spite of this, there is still hope for Israel. Now let us make a covenant before our God to send away all these women and their children, in accordance with the counsel of my lord and of those who fear the commands of our God. Let it be done according to the Law." "Arise! For this matter is your responsibility, but we will be with you; be courageous and act." Then Ezra rose and made the leading priests, the Levites and all Israel, take oath that they would do according to this proposal; so they took the oath. Ezra 10:2-5

Israel's men had taken Gentile wives and were under conviction to divorce them. The Scripture says that they were careful to "put away" those wives "according to the law" of God.

[Abiding in His Word]

There are many victims of the sins of others. Divorce is no different.

You are so correct, daffodyllady, in saying that there are many victims of the sins of others. But no where in scripture are the victims held responsible for or held accountable for the sin of another.

And some women are separated from abusive husbands. Sometimes, divorce just happens to a person.

Always regulations throughout the OT are made with the welfare and protection of innocent party in mind.

It happened to me. I had no choice in the matter.

However, I have the choice whether I will obey God in the matter of remarriage.

He forbids it. Period.

So God is penalizing you for the thing you were forced into? Your husband sinned by divorcing you and God is holding you accountable along with him? I think not. That clearly contradicts scripture that each must give an account for his/her own actions.

Romans 14:12 So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God.

Granted, innocent victims often suffer the consequences of another's sinful actions against them, but never are they penalized by God for the other's sinful actions. All the regulations and boundaries set in place by God, Moses, Jesus, and Paul are specifically designed to curb abuses against innocent parties and that includes marriage. They are directed to the abuser not the abused.

[daffodyllady]

Abiding,

no where in scripture are the victims held responsible for or held accountable for the sin of another.

Agreed. And nowhere does God hold anyone to account for being divorced by a spouse. In fact, I find great comfort in this verse:

Isaiah 54:6
For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God.

So God is penalizing you for the thing you were forced into? Your husband sinned by divorcing you and God is holding you accountable along with him?

No. I am not held accountable for my husbands sin. However, I have been put into a position where I bear a greater burden in this life, which I must look to God for help in. This is no penalty. No more than a victim of a crime, where one is left with no legs. God can use everything Satan meant for evil, to be to a greater glory than if it had never happened, if we surrender in obedience to Him, looking to Him for grace and power to live.

In Mark 10, where Jesus explains later about divorce and remarriage to His disciples...

10:10
And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

The story is finished in Matthew 19:

10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

I have chosen to count God great enough to give me grace to be able to receive and to obey the Words of Jesus. There are some who think the calling to singlehood as a divorced person, as too great to bear. Does God repeal His commands just because we think it is too hard? No. Rather, He gives us grace.

Most people, when faced with their cross, turn their backs on it, counting the cost too high. The Rich Young Ruler thought the kingdom of God wasn't worth it. And Jesus said that many will seek to enter the narrow gate, but will not be able to. Why? It requires the intensity of devotion, that every bit of self must die. Any part of self that we choose to allow to live, is our idol. For some people, marriage is an idol.

What do you think the purpose of the certificate of divorce was?

It was an invention of man. Not commanded by God at all. Ever. Man invented a declaration of divorce in order to declare himself free from an act performed by God. He was simply trying to salve his conscience, in joining up with another woman. And to the woman, man thought he was doing her a favor, in telling her she could go marry another man. But God did not tell them to do any of this.

Under the OT, God allowed them the hardness of heart, that led to such circumstances. He knew that such hardness could never be done away, outside of Christ changing them through His blood. Therefore, what seems to be a condoning of divorce in the OT, was actually a simple acknowledgment by God that sin exists.

Yes, God divorced Israel in Jeremiah 3. He said he gave her a bill of divorce. Did He actually write out a legal document and present it to her, giving her permission to go worship idols? No. He was simply using the bill of divorce that man had invented, as an illustration of how he forsook Israel when she turned to idols. YET, look at how he still considered Israel His wife, as she was still married to Him, even after the "bill of divorce":

Jeremiah 3:
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also...
12 Go and proclaim these words toward the north, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the LORD; and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful, saith the LORD,...
14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I AM MARRIED UNTO YOU.

Therefore, even under the OT, there was a witness to the fact that in God's eyes, divorce did not really end a marriage.

Rather, God desired reconciliation, both under the OT and under the NT. And remarriage works against reconciliation. What if my ex "remarries" after our divorce? Doesn't that completely destroy the union in God's eyes? No more than if he had shacked up with her before he even got a divorce. Because that is precisely what Jesus said he would be doing in that case. ADULTERY. His "legal" license to remarry is not legal in God's eyes.

Mark 10:9 "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."

This indeed is a rebuke against those who were desireous of putting away their wives for any cause.

Oh my, yes, and much more than that!

Mar 10:11 And He *said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; Mar 10:12 and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."

The woman who was "put away" and married another, in turn divorces him to marry another. This is obvious by the words "she herself."

Well, that is a handy modern translation you have there. I would turn to the Young's literal Translation again here, which says...

"Whosoever may put away his wife, and may marry another, doth commit adultery against her. And if a woman may put away her husband, and is married to another, she commiteth adultery."

So, this passage is not translated quite correctly, in your Bible. ( I know, no translation is perfect. But Young's Literal is LITERAL, to the point of being painful at times.)

But scripture does not refer to God winking at remarriage. Paul was speaking to previous ignorance about idol worship.

Well, God does refer to idolatry as spiritual adultery. Since marriage is a type of spiritual faithfulness to God, then any adultery or breaking of a marriage vow, is a type of idolatry. And previous ignorance is no excuse either, when it comes to remarriage.

Paul does speak of remarriage as permissable.

Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you. 1Cor 7:27-28

OH, My! So, you are saying by this, that Paul did not mean what he said in verses 10 and 11 of the same chapter?

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried (functioning as in verse 34), or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

Or perhaps you think there are different standards between the sexes, when it comes to remarriage? um.. well that would allow the stronger sex to remarry, and leave the weaker vessel to struggle alone... no, God doesn't work that way. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

I would venture this proposal:
Any interpretation of an unclear verse, that contradicts a clear verse, is wrong!
Jesus himself stated that whosoever --any man--no one excluded--same term as in John 3:16!!-- whosoever, puts away his wife, and is married to another, commits adultery. And Paul himself, in verse 10 and 11 of I Cor 7, states clearly that no woman who has been put away, is allowed to remarry. She has a husband, but she must remain unmarried. Chew on that. (Add in verse 39, while chewing.)

Therefore, the interpretation of the verses you quoted MUST agree with the clear injunctive of what the Word has already stated. (Or else Paul would have to be labeled a false teacher! --That is how we tell who is false, isn't it, if they contradict the clear word of God?)
The correct interpretation of 1Cor 7:27-28, is simple. Leave the division between verses. Paul is here wrapping up the chapter. He addresses one group, then another, in those listening to his teachings.

First he addresses those who are married: Art thou bound to a wife? Command: seek not to be loosed.

Second, he addresses those who are loosed from a wife. (The Greek word here for loosed is not the same as in Romans 7:2. There it means dissolved. Here it means broken. Therefore, this is talking about divorced people.)Art thou loosed from a wife? COMMAND: Seek not a wife! (How do you remarry if you didn't look for her?)

Third: He addresses unmarried men, and virgins: If they marry, they have not sinned.

Fourth: He addresses widows: they may marry, but only in the Lord.

I think I see a similar situation in the book of Ezra where God's people had married unbelieving foreign women and felt convicted to send them away.

Then Shecaniah son of Jehiel, one of the descendants of Elam, said to Ezra, "We have been unfaithful to our God by marrying foreign women from the peoples around us. But in spite of this, there is still hope for Israel. Now let us make a covenant before our God to send away all these women and their children, in accordance with the counsel of my lord and of those who fear the commands of our God. Let it be done according to the Law." "Arise! For this matter is your responsibility, but we will be with you; be courageous and act." Then Ezra rose and made the leading priests, the Levites and all Israel, take oath that they would do according to this proposal; so they took the oath. Ezra 10:2-5

Israel's men had taken Gentile wives and were under conviction to divorce them. The Scripture says that they were careful to "put away" those wives "according to the law" of God.

I do not read any command from God, in the entire book, or in the entire Old Testament, to put them away. What WAS commanded, was that they were not to marry them in the first place. The book of Ezra simply records the zeal of the people, in that they were even willing to put their wives away, to honor God. But I do not see that it did.

Throughout the Old Testament, outsiders were married and even brought into the bloodline of Jesus. It was no sin to marry an outsider, if that outsider converted to keeping the law. These Jews under Ezra were just learning about the Law. They themselves had been idolaters, as their wives. These heads of households were required by God to lead their homes by requiring them to keep the Law. If anyone in a Jewish household chose to worship an idol, they were supposed to be STONED, not divorced.

They never were commanded to put away their wives. They went beyond the Law, in their ignorance.

WHEW. This post has taken me about 2 hours to put together. I hope someone is helped by it.

[Abiding in His Word]

No. I am not held accountable for my husbands sin. However, I have been put into a position where I bear a greater burden in this life, which I must look to God for help in. This is no penalty.

If there is no penalty and you are not required to pay the penalty for your husband's sin, then can I assume you meant something different when you stated:

However, I have the choice whether I will obey God in the matter of remarriage.

He forbids it. Period.

because if you are saying you are commanded not to remarry because of your husband's decision to divorce, you are, in fact, paying the penalty for his sin.

No more than a victim of a crime, where one is left with no legs. God can use everything Satan meant for evil, to be to a greater glory than if it had never happened, if we surrender in obedience to Him, looking to Him for grace and power to live.

There is no glory in being divorced, daffodyllady, any more than than being the victim of a hit and run accident. Yes, how we handle the situation can indeed bring glory to God, but to say that the innocent party in a divorce somehow glorifies God is erroneous. In fact, to imply that God insists the innocent party must suffer the consequences of another's sin presents a distorted view of God's righteousness, justice, mercy, and compassion. A clear harmonious understanding of the entire Bible clearly shows God as hating those who victimize the innocent, neighbors, children, women, widows, orphans, slaves, and strangers and makes every provision for their well being and sustenance.

12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.[/quote]

I have chosen to count God great enough to give me grace to be able to receive and to obey the Words of Jesus. There are some who think the calling to singlehood as a divorced person, as too great to bear. Does God repeal His commands just because we think it is too hard? No. Rather, He gives us grace.

Then, evidently you are one of those Jesus spoke of who are able to receive it. But let's not forget that Jesus understood that not all were able; only those to whom it is given:

Matt 19:11 But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

What do you think the purpose of the certificate of divorce was?

It was an invention of man. Not commanded by God at all. Ever. Man invented a declaration of divorce in order to declare himself free from an act performed by God. He was simply trying to salve his conscience, in joining up with another woman. And to the woman, man thought he was doing her a favor, in telling her she could go marry another man. But God did not tell them to do any of this.

Are you saying that the words of Moses are not inspired and directed by God, but that those of Paul are?

Under the OT, God allowed them the hardness of heart, that led to such circumstances. He knew that such hardness could never be done away, outside of Christ changing them through His blood. Therefore, what seems to be a condoning of divorce in the OT, was actually a simple acknowledgment by God that sin exists.

The certificate of divorce had nothing to do with salving the man's conscience so he could join up with another woman. It was God's mercy for the victim who was put away because of the hard hearted. It enabled her to remarry so as not to be destitute. Again, His provision and concern for the innocent victims of other's sin.

Yes, God divorced Israel in Jeremiah 3. He said he gave her a bill of divorce. Did He actually write out a legal document and present it to her, giving her permission to go worship idols? No. He was simply using the bill of divorce that man had invented, as an illustration of how he forsook Israel when she turned to idols. YET, look at how he still considered Israel His wife, as she was still married to Him, even after the "bill of divorce"

14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for [color=#FF0000]I AM MARRIED UNTO YOU

No, God could not take back His wife who had already joined herself to another. Only under a new covenant could He become the bridegroom of any Jew who would not accept the terms of the new covenant since Israel as a nation had broken the covenant of the Old Testament.

"Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD. "But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. Jer 31:31-33

Rather, God desired reconciliation, both under the OT and under the NT. And remarriage works against reconciliation. What if my ex "remarries" after our divorce? Doesn't that completely destroy the union in God's eyes? No more than if he had shacked up with her before he even got a divorce. Because that is precisely what Jesus said he would be doing in that case. ADULTERY. His "legal" license to remarry is not legal in God's eyes.

Exactly! His "legal" license to remarry is not legal in God's eyes because of adultery. But that's not true of the one he put away who was put away against her will.

Well, that is a handy modern translation you have there.

NASB -
viewtopic.php?f=45&t=15507&p=177284#p177284

I posted the following verses where Paul does speak of remarriage as permissable and you have discounted it for some reason.

1) Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned..... (what else does "released from a wife mean if not divorced? .....but if they marry, they have not sinned.

2) But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. Unmarried is a different word from "virgins" as in verse 25.

3) Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases.... how clear is this?

4) Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no occasion for reproach..... 1Tim 5:14

Or perhaps you think there are different standards between the sexes, when it comes to remarriage? um.. well that would allow the stronger sex to remarry, and leave the weaker vessel to struggle alone... no, God doesn't work that way. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

I've tried very dilligently to show scripturally just the opposite; that God's regulations pertaining to divorce are precisely for the purpose of protecting the weaker vessel so she doesn't have to struggle alone following divorce.

I would venture this proposal:
Any interpretation of an unclear verse, that contradicts a clear verse, is wrong!

It's true that we cannot base a doctrine on an unclear verse just as we cannot base doctrine on a single verse. A truth must be in harmony with the whole of scripture; it will run through the entire counsel of God. And while I have not, am not, nor have I known any Christian who has encouraged divorce, at the same time, divorce, adultery, and remarriage does run through the entire Word of God despite God's perfect plan for marriage between two people.

Sin of any type is missing the mark for God's ideal and divorce is indeed missing the mark. God mercifully has made a provision for sin, including divorce, and that is the sacrifice of the cross where those sins are paid for in full. God does not remember the sin of divorce anymore than He remembered Paul's hundreds of murders.

For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the lord: I will put my laws upon their heart, and on their mind I will write them," he then says, "And their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more." Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin. Heb 10:14-18

This truth is consistent through the entire Word; that once the Lamb of God took away the sins of the world, we do not have to pay the price/penalty for them. IMHO, when Christians interpret scripture to ensure the innocent victim of any sin must pay the penalty for another's sin, they negate the work of the cross.

Divorce, we are certain, is the one sin we insist the victim must wear on his/her breast for the rest of their lives and pay the penalty for.

.....He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. Col 2:14

[daffodyllady]

Abiding,

if you are saying you are commanded not to remarry because of your husband's decision to divorce, you are, in fact, paying the penalty for his sin.

Living without a husband is no more a penalty than living without legs.
The penalty for the sin of adultery and divorce, is the same as for cutting off a person's legs. And Jesus paid that penalty, if the sinner accepts the gift.

Penalty is for sin. Life circumstances are simply where a person happens to be. And God allows each person to be in whatever situation they happen to be in. It is important to learn, in whatever state we are, therewith to be content, and not blame others for our situations. The term penalty, applied to the situation of living single, is not appropriate, under the New Testament, especially considering the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, empowering us to live above sin, and to the glory of God.

...to imply that God insists the innocent party must suffer the consequences of another's sin presents a distorted view of God's righteousness, justice, mercy, and compassion.

Oh my. Not so. The simple fact of life is that in this earthly life, many righteous people do indeed suffer earthly consequences from the sins of others! "God's righteousness, justice, mercy, and compassion" is what gives power to rise above these circumstances in the joy of the Lord, while actually pursuing reconciliation with the one who perpetrates crimes against us!

There is no glory in being divorced, daffodyllady, any more than than being the victim of a hit and run accident.

No earthly circumstance in itself is glorious. It is our response to that circumstance that is either glorious or inglorious. "All things work together for good to them that love God..." And to reject any circumstance as impossible, is to dishonor God.

A clear harmonious understanding of the entire Bible clearly shows God as hating those who victimize the innocent, neighbors, children, women, widows, orphans, slaves, and strangers and makes every provision for their well being and sustenance.

Well... I would not say that God hates sinners. He loves them. And He wants to reconcile them to himself. Otherwise, I would say AMEN to the above quote. However, I would say that His methods of provision for well-being and sustenance are higher than our ways. And it does not require remarriage after divorce, for Him to provide superbly! He may prefer to provide satisfaction with the lifestyle of a eunuch. If we choose sexual and financial satisfaction over God's provision of grace, do we not reject HIM?

Then, evidently you are one of those Jesus spoke of who are able to receive it. But let's not forget that Jesus understood that not all were able; only those to whom it is given:

Do you think I have no feelings? That I do not crave physical touch from a caring male? My hormones are just as strong as the next female. (My ex would be quick to tell you that I was not lacking in that department, ok? I desist from protest, only out of potential shame.) I am able only because God has given me this commandment. I testify, that my single, obedient lifestyle is a miracle before God! With every commandment of God comes power to obey it! Those who reject the Kingdom of heaven, (in the context of divorce and remarriage), reject the eunuch lifestyle they are called to. They count God as insufficient. Not worth the cost.

But with obedience comes grace, every time! Every commandment of God conveys power to step out and do the impossible. Why did Peter ask Jesus to tell him to come to Him on the water? Because he knew that unless Jesus said to do it, he could not. But when Jesus said to do something, the power would be there to do it!

Are you saying that the words of Moses are not inspired and directed by God, but that those of Paul are?

No. What I am saying is simply this: God did not give any commandment through Moses to give a bill of divorcement! He only commanded that the original husband was not allowed to take her back. The perceived commandment to give a rejected wife a bill of divorcement, was only read into the verse, because they were looking for that loophole! ( And so it is today, with the issue of remarriage! If you want to find a loophole, you will read things into the Word, that are not there at all. But if you are WILLING to be obedient to ANYTHING God says, you will not find the loopholes.)

I do say that Jesus did not uphold the law of Moses, to be practiced as it was in the Old Testament. He brought us a better standard. One that was less accommodating to hard hearts. Jesus did not bring us back to the standard of Moses in the matter of divorce and remarriage. Rather, he brought the standard back to Creation principles. In the kingdom of heaven, nothing else will do.

The certificate of divorce had nothing to do with salving the man's conscience so he could join up with another woman. It was God's mercy for the victim who was put away because of the hard hearted. It enabled her to remarry so as not to be destitute.

I know you have heard it taught this way. But God did not write any commandment to divorce her. All he commanded in Deuteronomy 24:1-4, is the prohibition against taking back a defiled wife. God never authored any societal structure in which single women would be destitute, either! The whole scheme was of man's making, not God's.

As to the discussion of Jer 3: 8-14, it is obvious that you have rejected the fact that God gave Israel a bill of divorcement, and subsequently confessed that He was still married to them!

No, God could not take back His wife who had already joined herself to another.

But he had confessed that she was still His wife! He said He was still married to her! The marriage was still valid, subsequent to the divorce declaration. If the marriage was invalid, then God would have had to bring in the New Covenant through a people other than Israel. They still stood in His sight! If you reject the clear Word of God, I have no more to say to you on that.

His "legal" license to remarry is not legal in God's eyes because of adultery. But that's not true of the one he put away who was put away against her will.

That does not make legal sense. You are saying the adulterous one is bound to his former marriage, which is no longer binding to his former wife? You can't have a legal marriage in which only one is bound to the covenant.

I posted the following verses where Paul does speak of remarriage as permissable and you have discounted it for some reason.

1) Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned..... (what else does "released from a wife mean if not divorced? .....but if they marry, they have not sinned.

2) But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. Unmarried is a different word from "virgins" as in verse 25.

3) Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases.... how clear is this?

4) Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no occasion for reproach..... 1Tim 5:14

I dealt with each of these. I will do so again.

1) Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned..... (what else does "released from a wife mean if not divorced? .....but if they marry, they have not sinned.

In order to square with Jesus words in Mark 10, the division must stand between the verses. Also, the division must stand there in order for Paul not to contradict his own self, where he says in verses 10 & 11.

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried (functioning as in verse 34), or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

Paul is talking to two different groups of people in verses 27 and 28. (They were the second and third in a list of four groups of people.) To divorced people, he says not to seek remarriage. (if you don't try to remarry, it won't happen.) Unmarried men and virgins, he addresses in the next verse, where he tells them that if they have married, they have not sinned. (he had to clarify that, because he was so gung-ho about the single life! lol)

Look carefully at the context: First, in verse 27a, he addresses those who were married. Second, in 27b, he addresses those who were divorced. (Not loosed as in dissolved, but loosed as in broken, from a marriage. Two different greek words there. This was directly spoken to DIVORCED people. Not to widows, or to widowers.) And the command was forbidding even looking at the opposite sex for a potential mate. Thirdly, Paul addresses the never-married, who were valid candidates for remarriage, in verse 28. This was a separate group from the "loosed from a wife" group. It must be read this way, to avoid self-contradiction within the chapter. Fourthly, in verse 39, Paul addresses widows, who did not fall under the command found in verse 27. You have to look at the Greek, to see that widows were not included in verse 27.

That is the only way the whole chapter can flow with no contradictions.

2) But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. Unmarried is a different word from "virgins" as in verse 25.

True, Unmarried is a different word from virgins. Verse 25 says that Paul had received no commandment from God, to tell virgins whether or not they should marry. It really was an individual basis! You were allowed to remain single, or you could get married! Virgins were free to decide for themselves. However, verse 9 only says it is better to marry than to burn. The Greek does not include "with passion". It could mean something different... like perhaps burning for eternity. And this would square with the rest of Scripture. Never does the Word give the idea that it is impossible to live without meditating on sex. Yet, that is what this verse would be saying, if we would add in "with passion." ... Think... if it is better to marry, than to burn with passion, then you would be saying there are only those two options! But that is not true!
For what Paul was talking about, when speaking of the unmarried, look at verses 32 and 34. It is a lifestyle. Not necessarily a definition of marital status. How do I know? Because He speaks in verse 11 of an unmarried woman, who still had a husband. ...Which squares with Jeremiah 3. ...Which squares with Mark 10, (where remarriage after divorce is called adultery...)

3) Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases.... how clear is this?

Well.. look at the context.

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.
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

Notice, that the bondage there has everything to do with living in PEACE. It said nothing about getting a divorce. It says nothing about remarriage after a divorce.
In context, this passage is saying that we are not in bondage to the law that requires us to fulfill the marriage requirements listed in verses 3 and 4. God allows us to be free from trying to keep our spouse fulfilled sexually. We can have internal peace over the issue, knowing that our spouse has chosen the path of sin for himself, and we have no way to help in that area anymore. Therefore, this verse says nothing about considering oneself free from a marriage, if we happen to be divorced. (And Paul says in verse 11, that we are NOT free to remarry, in such a case.)
This passage also says that we must try to live in peace with a former spouse for one reason: reconciliation! To God, and to His Word. If we fight over a divorce, we are not living in peace. If we refuse a divorce to one who wants it, we do not live in peace. In fact, by fighting in these things, we can drive a loved one further away from God. Reconciliation. That is what we are all about. And remarriage works against it.

4) Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no occasion for reproach..... 1Tim 5:14

Widows are free to remarry, because God ,who created the bond of marriage, dissolves it upon the death of one partner.

At times, a divorced woman is called a widow, in the Word. In the original languages of the Scriptures, when God calls a divorcee a widow, it isn't exactly like we hear it in English. It rather conveys the meaning of being left alone or forsaken, which really does apply to both widows and divorcees. But this does not mean we can fudge the lines in the area of remarriage. God has defined those lines very clearly for us.

Abiding,
Yes, divorce is a sin. Why? Because it is trying to undo what God has done. That is a horrific position to be in!

Fact is, that Jesus said whosoever divorces and remarries, continually commits adultery. That is the meaning in the Greek. The only way remarriage in such a case could be considered ongoing adultery, is because the man-made "legal" document that "frees" someone to "remarry" holds no water before God. Divorce was not so, from the beginning. And remarriage was not so from the beginning.

Anyone who is divorced and remarried, is in God's eyes, only living-in with a partner, to put it kindly. While the true marriage partner is being sinned against, constantly.


Abiding,
I am not paying any penalty for my husband's sin. Jesus did that. All of it.

I forgive my husband. I love him very much. I do not think he is good marriage material, but I vowed to be faithful to him till death parts us, according to the commandment of God. And you know how the Word treats vow-keeping.

Ecclesiastes 5:4
When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed.
5. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.
6. Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?

--Daff