|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 2/15/2008 9:07:50 AM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1639
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
Greetings,
Hey Cindy! Its been a while..
"and whosoever marries her that is divorced, commits adultery"
I know what the scripture is saying, however there are 2 points that we should be keeping in mind.
The pharse above uses the words "is divorced" meaning in context as Jesus presented it, that the women was on the receiving end of a divorce by those words "is divorced" meaning that someone divorced her, and that is not suggesting that the women or man divorced the other, "and whosoever marries her that "is divorced", is saying that the women who is divorced can only be divorced on the ground of SI. therefore whosoever marries her that is divorced, commits adultery"
The second point is Jesus was speaking of the same matter, where He first raised that allowence for SI, ....so on that ground the women/man is not divorced, the women/man divorced the other.
Hi Gypsy,
Yes, I agree Jesus is speaking of a woman who is divorced---meaning she is on the receiving end, not the seeking end. We also have Jesus telling us that the husband who puts her away is now committing adultery. You say that in cases where SI takes place, the divorced CAN marry again. Jesus gives us the example in Mt. 19:9, this is not the case----that whoever marries such a woman (who was put away innocently by a husband who afterwards commits adultery by marrying another) is committing adultery. Again, who is the new man committing adultery against if the wife is truly free from her adulterous husband???
_____________________________
Blessings as you seek Him, Cindy
What does the bible say on Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage?
www.marriagedivorce.com
www.cadz.net/faq.html
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 2/16/2008 12:15:33 AM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 1636
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lastblast
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
Greetings,
Hey Cindy! Its been a while..
"and whosoever marries her that is divorced, commits adultery"
I know what the scripture is saying, however there are 2 points that we should be keeping in mind.
The phrase above uses the words "is divorced" meaning in context as Jesus presented it, that the women was on the receiving end of a divorce by those words "is divorced" meaning that someone divorced her, and that is not suggesting that the women or man divorced the other, "and whosoever marries her that "is divorced", is saying that the women who is divorced can only be divorced on the ground of SI. Therefore whosoever marries her that is divorced, commits adultery"
The second point is Jesus was speaking of the same matter, where He first raised that allowance for SI, ....so on that ground the women/man is not divorced, the women/man divorced the other.
Hi Gypsy,
Yes, I agree Jesus is speaking of a woman who is divorced---meaning she is on the receiving end, not the seeking end. We also have Jesus telling us that the husband who puts her away is now committing adultery. You say that in cases where SI takes place, the divorced CAN marry again. Jesus gives us the example in Mt. 19:9, this is not the case----that whoever marries such a woman (who was put away innocently by a husband who afterwards commits adultery by marrying another) is committing adultery. Again, who is the new man committing adultery against if the wife is truly free from her adulterous husband???
Greetings,
quote:
Yes, I agree Jesus is speaking of a woman who is divorced---meaning she is on the receiving end, not the seeking end. We also have Jesus telling us that the husband who puts her away is now committing adultery.
Yes but what was the reason?, Jesus defined the reason and the cause, so telling us that the husband who puts her away is now committing adultery….the only way that could be in that scenario was because than man had no cause to divorce… and is now committing adultery against her.
And in the same matter when someone marries her who was divorced because that man had no cause to divorce….then they both are still married, which now causes” the her and him to commit adultery.
This was the flaw in Moses allowance that Jesus was telling the Pharisees that was not that way since the beginning.
quote:
You say that in cases where SI takes place, the divorced CAN marry again.
I haven’t said anything; I am using the scriptures.
It applies to whom it applies.
I know personally many, who were divorced by adulterers.
But being divorced by an adulterer by the Biblical definition, that divorce is void….and divorce is never void according to the exception.
The principal rides on the same principal … whereby I can agree where one who was divorced “without cause”, that both should remain single …and by that absolute in Jesus explanation without saying a word, dictates that they should remain single; unless one dies.
And by that same word... nothing is said to the contrary that the one who divorced the other for SI commits adultery, for reason it makes no mention as causing the one that was divorced for SI to commit…. its just not there...,
However the only time it is mentioned as causing is when the divorce was not for SI....
“both” in this instance simply can not apply as it would to the above… because of the difference in the cause factor “that they should remain single” it is just not there.
Paul uses the word "loosed" Greek for G3089 ,"from" a wife... meaning the wife was still living, and to be loosed in the first place the divorce in order to be loosed has to be proven as SI, and not for any reason.
That was the flaw in Moses allowance for divorce that Jesus was telling the Pharisees which was not that way since the beginning, because it was causing a lot of adultery that no one was aware of until Jesus came to tell them.
LG
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 2/16/2008 3:50:40 PM
|
|
|
lastblast
Posts: 1639
Joined: 9/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
And in the same matter when someone marries her who was divorced because that man had no cause to divorce….then they both are still married, which now causes” the her and him to commit adultery.
This was the flaw in Moses allowance that Jesus was telling the Pharisees that was not that way since the beginning.
Jesus didn't say there was a "flaw" in Moses' allowance of divorce to take place. Jesus made it very clear that divorce was not instituted by God---it was instituted by man due to man's hard-heartedness. Jesus was not trying to make it "fair" for the wife who wasn't permitted to remarry. He was making it clear that adultery did not give permission for ANY to marry without committing adultery.
quote:
Paul uses the word "loosed" Greek for G3089 ,"from" a wife... meaning the wife was still living, and to be loosed in the first place the divorce in order to be loosed has to be proven as SI, and not for any reason.
"loosed" means nothing of the sort, Gypsy. That is YOUR insertion of what you believe it means based upon your interpretation which allows people with living spouses to be joined with others. I do not read I Cor. 7:27 that way and though I don't care about "popular" opinion, most all of the commentaries I've read on that passage believe Paul is speaking about NEVER been married men or widowers, NOT the divorced as you assume.
quote:
That was the flaw in Moses allowance for divorce that Jesus was telling the Pharisees which was not that way since the beginning, because it was causing a lot of adultery that no one was aware of until Jesus came to tell them.
There was NO provision for divorce due to adultery in the law, Gypsy. The LORD commanded death!! While Jesus walked the earth, the law was still in effect----the thing was that the Jew was not abiding in the law, but many had gone their own ways (much like the church of today). There were to be no "living moms/dads" in the picture. There were no conflicts between living parents and the step parent situation as we see it today.
Jesus, when He came upon the woman caught in adultery, did not offer divorce as a solution to the sin, He offered mercy and forgiveness through REPENTANCE..........this is the "new" thing........LIFE instead of death. Not divorce instead of death.............not unforgiveness instead of forgiveness, not hardheartedness instead of mercy. He brought marriage back to the creation intent for marriage---NO LONGER TWO, but ONE FLESH---joined by God---until death does part (Rom. 7:2-3, I Cor. 7:39).
_____________________________
Blessings as you seek Him, Cindy
What does the bible say on Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage?
www.marriagedivorce.com
www.cadz.net/faq.html
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 2/17/2008 12:14:59 AM
|
|
|
huckfinn327
Posts: 314
Joined: 1/30/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
quote:
ORIGINAL: huckfinn327
The problem you and other divorce-remarriage advocates have is that you remove the "landmark": Exo 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. By permitting divorce and remarriage you are teaching just the opposite: Thou shalt commit adultery ... for the second marriage-this-side-of-death is nothing more that what Augustine called: "Adulterous-Marriage. Martin Luther opposed divorce and remarriage to the point that he preferred "polygamy". You can't have it both ways ... you cannot have remarriage-this-side-of-death without adultery.
Those of us who teach remarriage = adultery have a compassion to be used by the Lord to SAVE the lost. Yes, we believe that Ex. 20:14 clearly states: Thou shalt not commit adultery. That is the ONLY LEGALISM in our doctrine of forgiveness-salvation-reconcilation.
Luk 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
All for His Glory ... Huckfinn
Greetings
quote:
The problem you and other divorce-remarriage advocates have is that you remove the "landmark": Ex 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. By permitting divorce and remarriage you are teaching just the opposite: Thou shalt commit adultery ...
I have no problem with the truth…even with the half offered above, so we will offer the other half
Jesus related the innocent one as the one to whom adultery was “committed against”.
I suppose for the sake of argument that those advocates as you mentioned are those who have received a righteous judgment against the other?
Correct?
Loyal Gypsy
Greetings Gypsy,
We began by discussing "reconciliation" and its virtues towards salvation ... you have now moved the discussion to the innocent partner ... we will get back to the dynamics of reconciliation but for now:
First: What is half about the truth I offered?
Second: What is the reason for your conclusion regarding the idea of "righteous judgment" in matters of the doctrine of marriage and divorce as being the pesonal dynamic of those "advocates" that I refer to?
Those advocates do not express personal righteous judgment in their discussion of marriage and divorce. The Biblical context of my post which you have partially quoted above was supported by Jesus' Doctrine of Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage. My advocates only persuade for Jesus' teaching regarding marriage and divorce and nothing else.
I mentioned that the innocent partner had a vital role to play in the spiritual reconcilation of the guilty adulterous partner. You countered with an objection with your interjected idea of the "responsibility" of the innocent partner. I then objected to your interjection of the idea responsibility and then I argued that the innocent partner's dynamic was not one of responsibility but one of vicarious love. I then supported this by quoting Isa. 53 the 1Pet. on the Vicarious Atnonement of Christ and the admoniton that we should follow Christ in our love to our wives:
quote:
quote:huckfinn The innocent partner is vital to the resolution of the sinning partner’s crime of adultery
quote:
quote Gypsy: That is a slight contradiction, where is such a thing written?
I believe that Paul revealed that the one who leaves especially… is to remain unmarried for the other partner to be vital to the resolution.
And where does the Bible suggest that we are responsible for anyone else’s sin… other than our own??
So tells us, how does it come to pass… as you said, “that the innocent one”…how is it that the innocent one is now somehow responsible to the resolution of the sinning partner’s crime….when one has just said that they are innocent?
That makes absolutely no sense
LOL!
1Pe 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps.
In regards to marriage and divorce, I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment" ... I only see the teaching of Christ. I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
Now you have chose to discuss the innocent partner in Jesus' pericope of divorce.
The idea of an "innocent" partner is the vocabulary of us who discuss this subject. Jesus did not use the term "innocent partner" ... He left that term to us. The only thing He said was:
Luk 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
The advocates I refer to see Jesus teaching "permanency" ... which is explained as:
No-Remarriage-This-Side-Of-Death.
Mat 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
All for His Glory ... Huckfinn
_____________________________
NO-REMARRIAGE-THIS-SIDE-OF-DEATH .... JESUS TAUGHT CREATION MARRIAGE
www.jesusremarriagekeller.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 2/18/2008 8:40:22 AM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 1636
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huckfinn327
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
quote:
ORIGINAL: huckfinn327
The problem you and other divorce-remarriage advocates have is that you remove the "landmark": Exo 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. By permitting divorce and remarriage you are teaching just the opposite: Thou shalt commit adultery ... for the second marriage-this-side-of-death is nothing more that what Augustine called: "Adulterous-Marriage. Martin Luther opposed divorce and remarriage to the point that he preferred "polygamy". You can't have it both ways ... you cannot have remarriage-this-side-of-death without adultery.
Those of us who teach remarriage = adultery have a compassion to be used by the Lord to SAVE the lost. Yes, we believe that Ex. 20:14 clearly states: Thou shalt not commit adultery. That is the ONLY LEGALISM in our doctrine of forgiveness-salvation-reconcilation.
Luk 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
All for His Glory ... Huckfinn
Greetings
quote:
The problem you and other divorce-remarriage advocates have is that you remove the "landmark": Ex 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. By permitting divorce and remarriage you are teaching just the opposite: Thou shalt commit adultery ...
I have no problem with the truth…even with the half offered above, so we will offer the other half
Jesus related the innocent one as the one to whom adultery was “committed against”.
I suppose for the sake of argument that those advocates as you mentioned are those who have received a righteous judgment against the other?
Correct?
Loyal Gypsy
Greetings Gypsy,
We began by discussing "reconciliation" and its virtues towards salvation ... you have now moved the discussion to the innocent partner ... we will get back to the dynamics of reconciliation but for now:
First: What is half about the truth I offered?
Second: What is the reason for your conclusion regarding the idea of "righteous judgment" in matters of the doctrine of marriage and divorce as being the pesonal dynamic of those "advocates" that I refer to?
Those advocates do not express personal righteous judgment in their discussion of marriage and divorce. The Biblical context of my post which you have partially quoted above was supported by Jesus' Doctrine of Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage. My advocates only persuade for Jesus' teaching regarding marriage and divorce and nothing else.
I mentioned that the innocent partner had a vital role to play in the spiritual reconcilation of the guilty adulterous partner. You countered with an objection with your interjected idea of the "responsibility" of the innocent partner. I then objected to your interjection of the idea responsibility and then I argued that the innocent partner's dynamic was not one of responsibility but one of vicarious love. I then supported this by quoting Isa. 53 the 1Pet. on the Vicarious Atnonement of Christ and the admoniton that we should follow Christ in our love to our wives:
quote:
quote:huckfinn The innocent partner is vital to the resolution of the sinning partner’s crime of adultery
quote:
quote Gypsy: That is a slight contradiction, where is such a thing written?
I believe that Paul revealed that the one who leaves especially… is to remain unmarried for the other partner to be vital to the resolution.
And where does the Bible suggest that we are responsible for anyone else’s sin… other than our own??
So tells us, how does it come to pass… as you said, “that the innocent one”…how is it that the innocent one is now somehow responsible to the resolution of the sinning partner’s crime….when one has just said that they are innocent?
That makes absolutely no sense
LOL!
1Pe 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps.
In regards to marriage and divorce, I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment" ... I only see the teaching of Christ. I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
Now you have chose to discuss the innocent partner in Jesus' pericope of divorce.
The idea of an "innocent" partner is the vocabulary of us who discuss this subject. Jesus did not use the term "innocent partner" ... He left that term to us. The only thing He said was:
Luk 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
The advocates I refer to see Jesus teaching "permanency" ... which is explained as:
No-Remarriage-This-Side-Of-Death.
Mat 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
All for His Glory ... Huckfinn
quote:
In regards to marriage and divorce, I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment" ... I only see the teaching of Christ. I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
Greetings,
quote:
In regards to marriage and divorce, I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment" ... I only see the teaching of Christ. I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
quote:
I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment"
Yes I understand that, and you probably wont, ….I believe that is based on the rule that we the living epistles can not give such testimony, so in return we can not put into words how God moved in such situations of divorce and marrying again…..as it seems many of them seem to get kicked off the thread by doing so,
So we have to use the word of God(Jesus), and the Law of God…..
However I believe if we were to wager, and testimony was allowed then other side wound most likely be out numbered, 20,000 to 1
SO we have to stick to the topics which I believe begins as follows
quote:
Welcome to the one stop thread on the topic of marriage after divorce.
Please join the discussion as the thread takes us through the topic of marrying after divorce.
Is it ok to get married when one is divorced?
.
And the second is quite different
quote:
Should a person who has been divorced and since re-married be allowed to serve as pastor/deacon/elder/minister/etc.?
Well the Bible says this again and again, and is depending on the cause of the divorce, if one was divorced for adultery (which is the only reason) and never attempted reconciliation then the word says NO.
quote:
I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
Since you raised 2 point here…I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment
and ......how that applies to Jesus' doctrine of MDR
One
It’s always about the righteous judgments…is there any other?
A righteous judgment for one may not be for another, but it is still righteous.
Joh 5:30 - Show Context
I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous , because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.
That’s just the way it is…Its His Kingdom under His Lordship.
Two
quote:
I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
As prophesied in
Isa 2:3
Many people shall come and say, "Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, To the house of the God of Jacob; He (Jesus)will teach us His (Gods) ways, And we shall walk in His paths." For out of Zion shall go forth the law, And the word of the Lord (=the interpretation = messiah) from Jerusalem.
Since you asked, I'll work up what the Bible has to say about Jesus' doctrine of MDR, if I can find it, and if I do, it never will and never does contradict what the Father had established in the beginning.
But first, before we start…..one should study up and learn what these 2 things mean, that is if one wishes an un understanding, so we can come to that understanding….
Its not that hard, the whole Book is based on it
Opposites
For example.
But I say unto you, “Love” your “enemies”, “bless” them “that curse” you, do “good” to them “that hate” you, and “pray for them” which “despitefully use you”, and persecute you;
Here we see by definition that an opposite =“not conforming” to the usual type “or expected pattern” …which is obvious.
AND
Constants
In the example below we see constants ... by definition means = remaining the same and not varying with change in “other things”
God never changes.
Here is a little nugget for ya, which I am sure no one has ever shown to you
….. "Whenever" Jesus speaks the Father in the Gospels, He speaks in constants, not opposites. When He speaks of His Messiah-ship , he speaks in opposites , which is the way back.
Because the name of the game is reconciliation to the Father,
A constant by definition means = remaining the same and not varying with change this means that what God joins together or separates never changes in different circumstances.
as The scriptures relates mentions this as God is no respecter of persons
Example:
Example of a constant…..But if ye do not “forgive”, “neither will your Father”
which is in heaven “forgive” your trespasses.
The Bible is loaded with these 2 comparisons, because it is The Law of God…and the Word of the Law of Christ, which is the only way back..... As mentioned in Isa 2:3
What God.. has joined together… Marriage (=Established in the Beginning)
1 Absolute disassociation = (divorce) or the termination of association between God and Man…
2 Absolute reconciliation…or the ending of conflict (the messiah)
These 3 are all in the Fathers control, not ours, and were prophesied and established ….in the Beginning.
Enjoy…looking up those and other comparisons, and when your ready to continue, let me know??
LG
< Message edited by LoyalGypsy -- 2/18/2008 8:59:05 AM >
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 2/18/2008 11:57:42 PM
|
|
|
huckfinn327
Posts: 314
Joined: 1/30/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
quote:
ORIGINAL: huckfinn327
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
quote:
ORIGINAL: huckfinn327
The problem you and other divorce-remarriage advocates have is that you remove the "landmark": Exo 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. By permitting divorce and remarriage you are teaching just the opposite: Thou shalt commit adultery ... for the second marriage-this-side-of-death is nothing more that what Augustine called: "Adulterous-Marriage. Martin Luther opposed divorce and remarriage to the point that he preferred "polygamy". You can't have it both ways ... you cannot have remarriage-this-side-of-death without adultery.
Those of us who teach remarriage = adultery have a compassion to be used by the Lord to SAVE the lost. Yes, we believe that Ex. 20:14 clearly states: Thou shalt not commit adultery. That is the ONLY LEGALISM in our doctrine of forgiveness-salvation-reconcilation.
Luk 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
All for His Glory ... Huckfinn
Greetings
quote:
The problem you and other divorce-remarriage advocates have is that you remove the "landmark": Ex 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery. By permitting divorce and remarriage you are teaching just the opposite: Thou shalt commit adultery ...
I have no problem with the truth…even with the half offered above, so we will offer the other half
Jesus related the innocent one as the one to whom adultery was “committed against”.
I suppose for the sake of argument that those advocates as you mentioned are those who have received a righteous judgment against the other?
Correct?
Loyal Gypsy
Greetings Gypsy,
We began by discussing "reconciliation" and its virtues towards salvation ... you have now moved the discussion to the innocent partner ... we will get back to the dynamics of reconciliation but for now:
First: What is half about the truth I offered?
Second: What is the reason for your conclusion regarding the idea of "righteous judgment" in matters of the doctrine of marriage and divorce as being the pesonal dynamic of those "advocates" that I refer to?
Those advocates do not express personal righteous judgment in their discussion of marriage and divorce. The Biblical context of my post which you have partially quoted above was supported by Jesus' Doctrine of Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage. My advocates only persuade for Jesus' teaching regarding marriage and divorce and nothing else.
I mentioned that the innocent partner had a vital role to play in the spiritual reconcilation of the guilty adulterous partner. You countered with an objection with your interjected idea of the "responsibility" of the innocent partner. I then objected to your interjection of the idea responsibility and then I argued that the innocent partner's dynamic was not one of responsibility but one of vicarious love. I then supported this by quoting Isa. 53 the 1Pet. on the Vicarious Atnonement of Christ and the admoniton that we should follow Christ in our love to our wives:
quote:
quote:huckfinn The innocent partner is vital to the resolution of the sinning partner’s crime of adultery
quote:
quote Gypsy: That is a slight contradiction, where is such a thing written?
I believe that Paul revealed that the one who leaves especially… is to remain unmarried for the other partner to be vital to the resolution.
And where does the Bible suggest that we are responsible for anyone else’s sin… other than our own??
So tells us, how does it come to pass… as you said, “that the innocent one”…how is it that the innocent one is now somehow responsible to the resolution of the sinning partner’s crime….when one has just said that they are innocent?
That makes absolutely no sense
LOL!
1Pe 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps.
In regards to marriage and divorce, I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment" ... I only see the teaching of Christ. I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
Now you have chose to discuss the innocent partner in Jesus' pericope of divorce.
The idea of an "innocent" partner is the vocabulary of us who discuss this subject. Jesus did not use the term "innocent partner" ... He left that term to us. The only thing He said was:
Luk 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
The advocates I refer to see Jesus teaching "permanency" ... which is explained as:
No-Remarriage-This-Side-Of-Death.
Mat 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
All for His Glory ... Huckfinn
quote:
In regards to marriage and divorce, I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment" ... I only see the teaching of Christ. I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
Greetings,
quote:
In regards to marriage and divorce, I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment" ... I only see the teaching of Christ. I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
quote:
I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment"
Yes I understand that, and you probably wont, ….I believe that is based on the rule that we the living epistles can not give such testimony, so in return we can not put into words how God moved in such situations of divorce and marrying again…..as it seems many of them seem to get kicked off the thread by doing so,
So we have to use the word of God(Jesus), and the Law of God…..
However I believe if we were to wager, and testimony was allowed then other side wound most likely be out numbered, 20,000 to 1
SO we have to stick to the topics which I believe begins as follows
quote:
Welcome to the one stop thread on the topic of marriage after divorce.
Please join the discussion as the thread takes us through the topic of marrying after divorce.
Is it ok to get married when one is divorced?
.
And the second is quite different
quote:
Should a person who has been divorced and since re-married be allowed to serve as pastor/deacon/elder/minister/etc.?
Well the Bible says this again and again, and is depending on the cause of the divorce, if one was divorced for adultery (which is the only reason) and never attempted reconciliation then the word says NO.
quote:
I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
Since you raised 2 point here…I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment
and ......how that applies to Jesus' doctrine of MDR
One
It’s always about the righteous judgments…is there any other?
A righteous judgment for one may not be for another, but it is still righteous.
Joh 5:30 - Show Context
I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous , because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.
That’s just the way it is…Its His Kingdom under His Lordship.
Two
quote:
I truly do not understand your statement regarding "righteous judgment against the other" in matters of the Jesus' doctrine of MDR.
As prophesied in
Isa 2:3
Many people shall come and say, "Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, To the house of the God of Jacob; He (Jesus)will teach us His (Gods) ways, And we shall walk in His paths." For out of Zion shall go forth the law, And the word of the Lord (=the interpretation = messiah) from Jerusalem.
Since you asked, I'll work up what the Bible has to say about Jesus' doctrine of MDR, if I can find it, and if I do, it never will and never does contradict what the Father had established in the beginning.
But first, before we start…..one should study up and learn what these 2 things mean, that is if one wishes an un understanding, so we can come to that understanding….
Its not that hard, the whole Book is based on it
Opposites
For example.
But I say unto you, “Love” your “enemies”, “bless” them “that curse” you, do “good” to them “that hate” you, and “pray for them” which “despitefully use you”, and persecute you;
Here we see by definition that an opposite =“not conforming” to the usual type “or expected pattern” …which is obvious.
AND
Constants
In the example below we see constants ... by definition means = remaining the same and not varying with change in “other things”
God never changes.
Here is a little nugget for ya, which I am sure no one has ever shown to you
….. "Whenever" Jesus speaks the Father in the Gospels, He speaks in constants, not opposites. When He speaks of His Messiah-ship , he speaks in opposites , which is the way back.
Because the name of the game is reconciliation to the Father,
A constant by definition means = remaining the same and not varying with change this means that what God joins together or separates never changes in different circumstances.
as The scriptures relates mentions this as God is no respecter of persons
Example:
Example of a constant…..But if ye do not “forgive”, “neither will your Father”
which is in heaven “forgive” your trespasses.
The Bible is loaded with these 2 comparisons, because it is The Law of God…and the Word of the Law of Christ, which is the only way back..... As mentioned in Isa 2:3
What God.. has joined together… Marriage (=Established in the Beginning)
1 Absolute disassociation = (divorce) or the termination of association between God and Man…
2 Absolute reconciliation…or the ending of conflict (the messiah)
These 3 are all in the Fathers control, not ours, and were prophesied and established ….in the Beginning.
Enjoy…looking up those and other comparisons, and when your ready to continue, let me know??
LG
Greetings Gypsy,
quote:
(Quote Huck) I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment"
quote:
(Quote Gypsy) Yes I understand that, and you probably wont, ….I believe that is based on the rule that we the living epistles can not give such testimony, so in return we can not put into words how God moved in such situations of divorce and marrying again…..as it seems many of them seem to get kicked off the thread by doing so,
quote:
Quote Gypsy) What God.. has joined together… Marriage (=Established in the Beginning)
1 Absolute disassociation = (divorce) or the termination of association between God and Man…
2 Absolute reconciliation…or the ending of conflict (the messiah)
These 3 are all in the Fathers control, not ours, and were prophesied and established ….in the Beginning.
From my entrance onto this forum I have read your ONE constant analogy that Jesus doctrine of divorce is based on the sin of Adam and his explusion from the Garden or the Fall. You have clearly stated that again above as:
(Quote Gypsy) Absolute Disassociation. (DIVORCE) or the termination of association between God and man.
IMHO I believe that you do not have Biblical "authority" to equate the sin of Adam with Jesus' teaching of divorce. Jesus does not teach this lesson anywhere in the Scriptures. I have objected to your position on this analogy (Fall = Divorce). I believe it is fallacious. I believe you are permitting husbands to exterminate or "terminate the associaton" of their wives ... as I told you before you are copying the Westminister Confession regardng divorce ... i.e. the guilty adulterous spouse is to be considered "dead."
As I have labored to reveal the heart of man ... that man believes he is a King and that as King of his own Castle he has a God given right to exterminate and expel and unwanted wife from his kingdom-castle.
Jesus clearly taught that man and woman become one ... they twain shall be ONE FLESH ... and that one flesh is inseparable and permanent ... Let not man put asunder ... divorce is a Myth in the doctrine of Jesus.
My words are not righteous-judgment ... they are what I truly believe that Jesus taught ... I have never used any disparaging words to explain this ... I have never even used the common forum righteous-judgment as the harmful derogation ( LOL ).
Thus I totally reject the Doctrine of the Fall = the Ultimate-Divorce. I believe that you are the only source of this doctrine in Christian literature. I believe that such a doctrine is harmful to the Gospel of Christ.
Sincerely ... All for His Glory,
Huckfinn
< Message edited by huckfinn327 -- 2/19/2008 12:10:57 AM >
_____________________________
NO-REMARRIAGE-THIS-SIDE-OF-DEATH .... JESUS TAUGHT CREATION MARRIAGE
www.jesusremarriagekeller.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 2/22/2008 9:20:02 PM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 1636
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huckfinn327
Greetings Gypsy,
quote:
(Quote Huck) I don't see anything posted here on this forum by "these advocates" of personal "righteous judgment"
quote:
(Quote Gypsy) Yes I understand that, and you probably wont, ….I believe that is based on the rule that we the living epistles can not give such testimony, so in return we can not put into words how God moved in such situations of divorce and marrying again…..as it seems many of them seem to get kicked off the thread by doing so,
quote:
Quote Gypsy) What God.. has joined together… Marriage (=Established in the Beginning)
1 Absolute disassociation = (divorce) or the termination of association between God and Man…
2 Absolute reconciliation…or the ending of conflict (the messiah)
These 3 are all in the Fathers control, not ours, and were prophesied and established ….in the Beginning.
From my entrance onto this forum I have read your ONE constant analogy that Jesus doctrine of divorce is based on the sin of Adam and his expulsion from the Garden or the Fall.
You have clearly stated that again above as:
(Quote Gypsy) Absolute Disassociation. (DIVORCE) or the termination of association between God and man.
IMHO I believe that you do not have Biblical "authority" to equate the sin of Adam with Jesus' teaching of divorce. Jesus does not teach this lesson anywhere in the Scriptures. I have objected to your position on this analogy (Fall = Divorce). I believe it is fallacious. I believe you are permitting husbands to exterminate or "terminate the association" of their wives ... as I told you before you are copying the Westminister Confession regarding divorce ... i.e. the guilty adulterous spouse is to be considered "dead."
As I have labored to reveal the heart of man ... that man believes he is a King and that as King of his own Castle he has a God given right to exterminate and expel and unwanted wife from his kingdom-castle.
Jesus clearly taught that man and woman become one ... they twain shall be ONE FLESH ... and that one flesh is inseparable and permanent ... Let not man put asunder ... divorce is a Myth in the doctrine of Jesus.
My words are not righteous-judgment ... they are what I truly believe that Jesus taught ... I have never used any disparaging words to explain this ... I have never even used the common forum righteous-judgment as the harmful derogation ( LOL ).
Thus I totally reject the Doctrine of the Fall = the Ultimate-Divorce. I believe that you are the only source of this doctrine in Christian literature. I believe that such a doctrine is harmful to the Gospel of Christ.
Sincerely ... All for His Glory,
Huckfinn
Greetings,
Hey Huck, did you look up any of those things yet?
quote:
as I told you before you are copying the Westminster Confession regarding divorce
I need to straighten out a few things first,
I remember you bringing up this way back when, but unfortunately it is no longer searchable in the threads so I can verify my reply, and I believe I said back then that I never heard of this doctrine.
But then again I looked it up again, and this is as far as I will go because you did not offer much as to what that doctrine adheres to… that I assumed to be copying.
The Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith, in the Calvinist theological tradition. Although drawn up by the 1646 Westminster Assembly largely of the Church of England, it became, and remains the 'subordinate standard' of doctrine in the Church of Scotland and has been influential within Presbyterian churches worldwide (with various changes it has also been adopted by some Congregationalists and even Baptists).
Like I said before, Gypsy and religious people do not mix.
Since this looks like a Calvinistic reformation…. it is not fitting to discuss that in this thread,
I believe there is a thread for this, and if I adhered to that then I guess I would be posting in that thread, which I haven’t to the best of my knowledge... nor will I!
This thread suggests RE: Remarriage “”After Divorce”” - One Stop Thread, I guess Fritz meant marrying again after one is DIVORCED… which is supposed to be the topic…unless I am mistaken??
….so one would assume that the divorce had already occurred... which is even more my ONE constant analogy, along with the word remarriage, which not found in the scriptures.
But I fail to see the simplest logic in attempting to keep people who are already divorced from divorcing. Noble but a little late…IMO don’t ya think! LOL!
The way I see it is One stop= divorce for those considering, marrying again “after” divorce-one stop.
= It’s just too confusing. For others, relating the two,
quote:
From my entrance onto this forum I have read your ONE constant analogy that Jesus doctrine of divorce is based on the sin of Adam and his expulsion from the Garden or the fall.
, but for some reason the other side since they entered into this thread has changed it into IMO a one stop DIVORCE thread. In which I believe there is another thread to discuss what it is you are bringing to the table, about Jesus preventative doctrine of divorce such as you mentioned,
About Jesus doctrine of divorce, as I mentioned and as I believe does not change what the Father has already brought to the table.
Even by Jesus own words… Mt 10:24 - Show Context
That A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a “servant” (Jesus) above his master.
However the Hebrew scripture related the Genesis account to the Law, Jesus most definitely did not raise himself above His master, which is God.
So that is what I believe that is also found in the scriptures, the same as your Jesus doctrine of divorce is found.
quote:
From my entrance onto this forum I have read your ONE constant analogy that Jesus doctrine of divorce is based on the sin of Adam and his expulsion from the Garden or the fall.
Well then let me explain…first it is definitely not my analogy and I appreciate the praise, but it is the OT analogy, according to “Jewish” Doctrine…which Jesus Himself… I believe quoted from, as well as Rabbis today,
which is simply Moses in writing the forerunner for the Law in Genesis… showed us that one can not associate “flesh with the Spirit”, “Salvation and Sin”, all subject to and = to divorce= the termination of association =from one another.
And the definition I offered is that…a definition
Absolute disassociation = (the definition of divorce) the termination of association…. I believe it was taken from the Encarta, under lookup… in MSWord 2003.
What is wrong with that…. is it not Biblically correct?
quote:
IMHO I believe that you do not have Biblical "authority" to equate the sin of Adam with Jesus' teaching of divorce.
Absolutely correct!
Because in this thread…I believe there is absolutely nothing to equate…. because divorce has already occurred.
Since the day I was led to this thread, the other side has been in their own ONE constant analogy… in that Jesus doctrine of divorce says and therefore teaching … that one should “divorce” and return to the other, which is just “as you said”, a doctrine that is harmful to the Gospel….and may I add a contradiction to that scenario…IMHO!
LOL!
Which one is worse Huck who is teaching who …what?…IYO?
quote:
I believe you are permitting husbands to exterminate or "terminate the association" of their wives ...... i.e. the guilty adulterous spouse is to be considered "dead."
Where did I say that?
quote:
As I told you before you are copying the Westminister Confession regarding divorce
quote:
Thus I totally reject the Doctrine of the Fall = the Ultimate-Divorce.
I can respect that…. but what does that have to do with this thread?
We all have to pickup our own mats and do what “the Father” has told us to do, which is why I have not been led to post in the Calvinist thread, or limited to the divorce thread…I have been led here.
quote:
I believe “that you are” the only source of this doctrine in Christian literature. I believe that such a doctrine is harmful to the Gospel of Christ.
Now here is where things become confusing….. You have just said that I was copying the doctrine…which I have never read… and now I am the only source of this doctrine in Christian literature
….I’m all for respecting the beliefs of others, that is until it reaches the point where they seem to be “telling” one what is not true
Come on Huck….make up you mind so we can get on with the topic….
In case you haven’t noticed the congregation has left the building…LOL!
Loyal Gypsy
< Message edited by LoyalGypsy -- 2/22/2008 9:28:30 PM >
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 3/1/2008 7:52:45 PM
|
|
|
lostsomuch
Posts: 224
Joined: 3/1/2008
Status: offline
|
So, as an example, the general concensus on the teaching of MDR seems to be that adultery aside; if you get divorced from someone who is abusing your children and you, admittedly and is unrepentant.
If that same spouse refuses to abide by scripture in any way (even just in one way knowingly and refusing repentance, claiming to believe in God, even when the pastors at their church and counselors try to instruct them otherwise.. their spouse (and children) is/are bound to be with them for life (never filing a divorce) and be subject so such abuse or file a permanent separation and be a spinster for life, still dealing with the abuse.
Is that right?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 3/1/2008 7:58:12 PM
|
|
|
lostsomuch
Posts: 224
Joined: 3/1/2008
Status: offline
|
The consensus seems to be that divorce is a sin. Remarriage is a sin unless your spouse commits physical adultery and even in some cases of that. Marriage is until death do you part and committing adultery separates you from God and causes you to lose your salvation. Is that right? I am sorry, I couldn't read all three-hundred and seven pages so I just skimmed here or there. This is the gist of what has been written to this point, is it not?
I thought all we had to do to be saved was to believe in the Lord? Knowing we needed a Saviour because we are not perfect and would slip up, how could slipping up cost us our salvation?
Isn't that back to the seven deadly sins stuff?
I thought the only unforgivable sin was blasphemy against the spirit?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 3/1/2008 9:11:26 PM
|
|
|
cadz
Posts: 147
Joined: 9/18/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: losingsomuch
I thought the only unforgivable sin was blasphemy against the spirit?
Correct, Try this link Divorce/Remarriage is Not the Unforgivable Sin
_____________________________
Cheryl
Why I repented of an adulterous remarriage &
cadz FAQ about Divorce & Remarriage
http://www.cadz.net/mdr.html
Visit my audio website http://www.cadz.net to listen to broadcasts on Marriage & Divorce
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 8:08:00 AM
|
|
|
car2ner
Posts: 2308
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: just north of Florida
Status: offline
|
quote:
the general concensus on the teaching of MDR
The only problem with the general concensus is that it really isn't. There are quite a few of us who have given up the debate from shear redundency.
The best way to agrue our point is to live our lives as we believe that God would have us live it.
_____________________________
bungalow time http://www.car2ner.2ya.com (my blog)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 3/2/2008 9:45:44 AM
|
|
|
lostsomuch
Posts: 224
Joined: 3/1/2008
Status: offline
|
I am trying to finish reading your statements at Cadz.net.
You make a good case.
However, what about the Matt 18:15-20 process? I hear a lot of, let scripture speak for itself and since God did not say we could, then we can't. Well, likewise, if God did not say we can not, then we can (i.e. apply Matt 18).
If you apply Matt 18 through the church, and your spouse calls themselves a believer but acts as though an unbeliever, then, they are to be treated as one. We told not to be unequally yoked to an unbeliever. So, what does that mean?
Abuse is no less a sin than adultery but neither one excuses the other. Salvation is based on grace of God alone. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy against the Spirit, according to the Word. We are also saved by grace, not by works - although our faith is evidenced by our heart which dictates our words and actions, it does not mean that we are condemned eternally for our failings - lest none of us would be saved, with or without Christ as our Saviour.
So there are a lot of things that are brought into this discussion. The bible is one whole, not individual parts.
While God is the God over ALL and not just the saved, He condemns those who refuse His ways. In fact, He said:
quote:
Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.” Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 3/3/2008 4:01:09 AM
|
|
|
Lionroot
Posts: 3
Joined: 10/21/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
There was NO provision for divorce due to adultery in the law, Gypsy. The LORD commanded death!! While Jesus walked the earth, the law was still in effect----the thing was that the Jew was not abiding in the law, but many had gone their own ways (much like the church of today).
Your absolutely right, and to that end I would like to point out two things.
1) There is no provision in the Torah for a woman to divorce her husband.
2) In the NT when a woman is said to divorce her husband, it is a legal divorce that is being spoken of.
Hope that sheds some light on the discussion.
God Bless,
Robert
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 3/4/2008 11:08:56 AM
|
|
|
SealedEternal
Posts: 971
Joined: 3/20/2006
From: Milwaukee, WI
Status: offline
|
quote:
[Edited by Admin.]
First of all there is no provision for him to divorce her or vice versa anywhere in the Bible, except for those under the Old Covenant Law of Moses for the cause of premarital fornication which has no application today. God says the two are joined by Him into one flesh and that no man can | | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
