Thank you!!!! I’ve taken a stand on this matter and have been under heavy scrutiny for it! I was told that I’m living in bondage and God wants us to be happy. I was taught that the innocent person can remarry and that I should let go of legalism and be open to revelation. Unfortunately the church I’m apart of have many who in a divorce and remarriage union including the Pastor. I’ve been told that I’m throwing away my life because 75% of the world is divorced. I told them I will gain life because I chose to obey God!
This dude is on point. Through him God has spoken clearly. Remarriage is sin if an existing spouse still has breath. He hit another point. We must stand and don’t be wishy washy. This spoke to me HARD. I am in a remarriage and I’m packing and leaving. My neighbors are professing believers in a remarriage. They scowl at me cause my wife told them I’m leaving. My other neighbors came to me trying to tell me I’m wrong and told me I have cheapened Gods grace. I put her in check but after the conversation I felt like Elijah running from Jezebel. Every time I go outside I hang my head ducking my neighbors feeling ashamed. Why should I be ashamed when I’m the one standing for truth. They should be ashamed for living in and calling evil good. I worked at a mega church and told the 3 pastors that married me my remarriage is sin. They told me recant or face disfellowship. I resigned. I’ve lost friends job and at times certain family members are against me. Yes if you stand for truth it will cost you. I feel alone. Hardly anyone but a few stand with me. But I press on. I encourage those who are experiencing the same to stand firm, hold your ground walk in truth no matter the cost. I will be celibate. No biggie cause I have everything I need in Jesus. Last time I checked sex is not a need. Jesus bless you all
WOW...what a story ! I will tell you , I have been divorced for 11 years and would like to share my life with someone but I have been very conflicted. i don't date because it almost always leads to sin....it is a very tuff road
GOD BLESS YOU BROTHER MY WIFE LEFT ME 23 YEARS AGO AND I HAVE BEEN SINGLE EVER SINCE IT IS STILL HEARTBREAKING BECAUSE MY WIFE MARRIED 2 MORE TIMES I STILL LOVE HER AND PRAY FOR HER MY HEART IS WITH YOU AND SO IS GOD YOU ARE RIGHTEOUS BEFORE THE LORD
Praise God for speaking the truth! Not many will receive these words. My heart grieves for all who are partaking in this sin. Thank You LORD for sparing me from becoming an adulteress with a divorced man. Reconcile or remain unmarried!
Grace to you Shana Do you realize your "convictions" start from suppositions that are errant? For instance, Jesus didn't prohibit remarriage after divorce as "supposed". I'm aware the Apostle Paul (many years later) gave a prohibition when answering the questions submitted to him my the church of Corinth (1 Cor. 7:1) under one of the situations he addressed, but that was unique and not uniform as you've been made to think. If you don't follow biblical chronology then a random selection of scripture interpretation will cause you to bypass when remarriage was actually prohibited in God's Word and to what extent. Blessings
Just three days ago my sister in Christ sent me your video about head covering that's how know about you and I'm loving your teachings, No diluting the word of God, God bless you sir🙏🏾
Thank you for making this video. My wife left/divorced almost 8 years ago. The "clean pain/dirty pain" is absolutely true. Only a literal death frees anyone to marry another. Otherwise it's merely adultery to be forsaken in repentance, in the eyes of God.
@@josephrobi6806 no it is bondage....not about being bound....it is a different term with a different meaning.....as it is not about the covenant....but the relationship with the spouse....after all....marriage is not bondage....
Where does Paul say REMARRIAGE? Not there. You are adding it. 1 Cor 7:13-16 is about keeping peace between believer and unbeliever. Believer don't leave!! But if unbeliever insists on leaving, let them go because "Blessed are the peacemakers" said Jesus in Matthew 5. The believer remains alone.
@@philipbuckley759 Amen Philip. This guy is determined to believe that illegitimate remarriages are acceptable. He must be remarried or has someone close to him that is. He doesn’t have ears to hear. He just posted on my comment with his subversion of the truth. This fellow is deceived.
@@jesusstudentbrett AMEN AMEN. That part in the scripture about God calling us to peace so many overlook. Blows my mind. God is calling us to peace not Remarriage. If he wanted us to remarry he would have said so. It’s plain as the nose on one’s face. Folks will see and hear what they want to hear. I use to be one of them. Blind and deceived. They like I was won’t see unless God gives them sight. It will happen no other way.
I am a separated man, who is now single again and I must remain celibate. But I need to heal from other problems in my life. If I reconcile with my wife that will be wonderful, but I recognize that it may not be. I am already living celibate, so I will simply continue on. It's sad but part of the Fall.
32:30 YES!!! Unrepentant adultery leads to everlasting torment in hell. Repentance is not just confessing and being sorry, but being sorry enough to stop the sin - thus by exiting the adulterous remarriage.
Umm Jesus paid for all your sin. You don’t get forgiveness by repentance but by believing the gospel and placing your trust and faith in his blood atonement.
@@davidchupp4460 then why the verse...the one, who endures....to the end shall be saved....Jesus says, if you love me, keep my commandments.....so salvation, by faith, alone is a false teaching...
@@philipbuckley759 look that’s simply untrue. Paul brought imputed righteousness, justification and sanctification by faith in Christ Jesus and his shed blood for our atonement to us, the body of Christ given directly by revelation of Jesus Christ. Trusting in anything else is trusting in yourself versus Jesus and will damn you.
@@philipbuckley759 loving Jesus and keeping his commandments are great things to do. It however is not salvation. Where in that verses does he say do it for eternal life? Reading salvation into non salvation verses is one of THE BIGGEST problems Christians have. Eternal life comes from believing in Jesus and his shed blood for my sins. And that if I do so I have EVERLASTING life. The scripture does not say everlasting is temporary and you lose it if you don’t do certain things. You can’t have everlasting life if it’s NOT everlasting. That’s a contradiction in terms. Scripture doesn’t lie. It’s humans who twist scripture who are liars.
Thank you. My husband and I where separated 2 years. We are happy now because deep down we believed in these truths. Even if it didn't always feel sensible in the moment. I pray you'll keep preaching this. Amen.
Wow. My husband and I have separated because he was previously married. We got married in the evangelical church. Sadly, he’s not on the same page, so he’s filing for divorce instead of walking this path with me. Please pray for him
@@mommabsfarm8009 that means that your...marriage, was adultery and he did the correct thing.....admit, and quit, the sin.....of adultery....you are fortunate.....so one needs to pray, but for you..
Hey sister. I really enjoyed it too, and I know that Jesus has gone to prepare a place for us, and will take His holy people to that place soon. 1 Thessalonians 4. Glad that you know it too.
@@philipbuckley759 The context of chapter 1 Corinthians 7 is about marriage. Single, Christian couples, mix couples and widows. The mix are unsaved living with a Christian look at that one. I think the Lord is teaching about divorce and remarriage for the mix couples. Because why did he separate them all. If the lord was against remarried he would simply put a blanket statement for all of them but he did not. To my understanding he mentioned the mix couples because the situation is different compare to the Christians couples
Grace to you Tatiana Honestly, you are not interpreting Jesus' teaching on this issue truthfully!!! For instance, what did Jesus mean when He spoke of "divorce"? What did Jesus mean when He said "marries another"? Doesn't your "interpretation" require you to dismiss those events as if they didn't really occur? Try interpreting Jesus from the biblical precedents to which He refers instead of the false theories interjected into His teaching. Blessings
Mind blowing fact: the ESV Translation has a notation about Matthew 19:9 that states some manuscripts repeat the same verbiage from Matthew 5:32 in place of the language in Matthew 19:9… Meaning, no “exception clause,” is even in existence! Wow.
if a man marries a divorced woman, with a living spouse, then this is not a covenant marriage, it is adultery which means the man needs to leave this relationship which usually means divorce....and hence not having been in a covenant relationship, he is free to marry someone else....
@@josephrobi6806 What you state and what the verse states are not the same. That is very frequently the problem in these discussions. The permission is to let the unbeliever go--that the believer is not bound to them. It says nothing of remarriage. "Bound" is not even the same word as is used in the Greek in verse 39 about the marriage vow.
When Jesus answered about divorce, He was addressing the Pharisees who were wanting to know 'if they could put away for any reason'. They were asking about the Law of Moses divorce law and that, for one, just simply didn't include adultery. It was separate. But it all goes even deeper as marriage is a representation of Christ and the church, not Christ and the world.
@@randyclark222 the divorce and remarriage for adultery doctrine is based solely on the supposed guilt of the wife in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. However, the wife, in the above scriptures, is clearly not guilty of fornication because the Jews (that Jesus was speaking to) were still living under the law, and if fornication was discovered, there was a moral obligation to report the offender according to Deuteronomy 22:13-24. The wife, who would have been found guilty of fornication, was subsequently stoned to death, according to the law, which had still governed the Jews up until Christ's death on the cross. The same for a woman caught in adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10. How could a wife, guilty of fornication, or adultery, under the law of Moses, be given a writing of divorcement and be caused to commit adultery with whosoever marries her, that is divorced? Jesus is clear, in these examples, that the wife is not guilty of fornication, but is still caused to commit adultery if she marries another man now that she is divorced. This is the only way that Matthew 5:31-32, and Matthew 19:9 keep harmony with Romans 7:2-3, and 1 Corinthians 7:39. Unlike the synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, which were written to evangelize the Gentiles, Matthew was written to the Jews, and has of 24 characteristics that identify it as intended for the house of Israel. The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death. The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. Christ's death on the cross caused the Jews to become dead to the law of Moses, so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the ordinances of law of Moses as justification, over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the ordinances of the law is no longer possible, for Israel, and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15. Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife. Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned, by an unbelieving spouse, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way some translations word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not enslaved" which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, which is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 shows the Apostle Paul giving those who are abandoned permission to remarry, do not understand the command that Christ gives is to an abandoned husband, in 1 Corinthians 7:11, and that he "must not divorce" his wife, and his wife is commanded to "remain unmarried or else be reconciled" to her husband. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh, due to one's unbelief, puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, and himself, by implying that Paul has issued an opposing command to verses 10-14 in verse 15. Some also teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16. The Jewish couples in ancient Israel, who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death, either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with verses 25-26 speaking exclusively to men that have never married. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly in regard to virgin women who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is speaking of a virgin who has become of age to bear children when it says, "let them marry." This is a clear command, to a single man, who has taken a virgin to be his wife. Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring again to the single man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged), under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which again means single men, in the congregation, who have betrothed a wife, do well if they marry, and those who choose not to marry their virgin brides do better, under the current climate. For more proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unscriptural unions. The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24. Mark 10:1-12 and Matthew 19:1-12 both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans, and likewise Luke to evangelize the Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching. Please use wisdom when living in any situation against what the scriptures command.
A few questions: 1 Cor 7:15 Is not the Christian unbound (not held to the laws) from the marriage? 2-If divorce and remarriage occur, wouldn't getting another divorce also be a sin?
Thank you so much for this very detailed and in-depth teaching on divorce and remarriage. However, I am very confused about the exception clause where you gave three different views in church history. The book of Matthew was written to the Jews and in the Jewish culture, fornication is referring to their betrothal period which you did mention. Jesus did not give any exception because marriage is until death. Before the wedding during the betrothal was the only time you were allowed to give a certificate of divorce due to fornication. After the wedding, there no longer was an exception. If a woman was found to have committed adultery or any sexual immorality after the wedding she would’ve been stoned to death. And it was called a decree of divorce during the betrothal time because it was considered a marriage even though the wedding had not yet occurred. So while this teaching overall is very detailed it falls apart in a very crucial way with regard to the fact that Jesus said marriage is permanent, until death.
So the final word is...... God's words are final. What god has joined together let not man put asunder. Until death do ye part. Ask God for a deeper understanding of His word. God bless 🙏
I truly respect and appreciate Finny's message. I absolutely agree that the marriage covenant is the most sacred one you can make and should never be broken. I also agree that context in any Biblical study matters immensely which is where I would like to offer my observation by starting with a couple of questions. 1. Who was Jesus speaking to when He first made the decree about divorce? 2. What was the context of his response? 3. What is the purpose of the law?
Who? The Pharisees and those He was teaching. Context? I personally think it was explained pretty well in this video, however if you have any thoughts to add please expound upon this teaching. Purpose of the law? To point to Christ and God's plan of the ages. What Christ (as well as John and Paul) taught were principles present in the law but were not adhered to. I happen to think people were well aware of these principles but were using written law as an excuse to sin and gain forgiveness without any change of heart. The law was a concession but only in order to point to something greater, that is Christ in you, the hope of glory. The Jews were given over to their hardened ways. The church today has repeated many of the same mistakes but in different ways. She has also been given over to her adulterous ways. The only way to arrive at truth nowadays, in the midst of many winded, cherry-picked doctrines, is to have the Spirit lead you in all things, including your understanding of Scripture. The problem is that many have received the wrong spirit, the spirit of Babylon, thinking this devil disguised as an angel of light is the Spirit of God.
The Zaccheus argument is weak because he chose to restore what he took out of his own conviction. He wasn’t commanded to repay. Before I was saved I stole clothes from a small business in a mall, years later I was saved. Should I go back and find that store and repay them??
@@fotwboston 😂 nonsense. That was years ago I don’t even remember the store. I’m forgiven and so I move on and walk in the newness of life. You’re argument is nonsensical
@@Chris.A.H God calls us to repent. Restitution is a part of repentance. The fact that you mentioned this unresolved sin is an indicator that it is still open and un dealt with. The scriptures are clear- when we sin we need to make right what we can. This is repentance. If you can't then you can't, but if you can you should. This is always the case with biblical repentance.
@@fotwboston give me scripture where it says when you repent you have to go back and make it right. You said scripture is clear, so where is it in the Bible? Repent means to turn from sin. So me stealing those clothes before I was saved, means not to go back and steal clothes again. I repented and so I turn from that sin. Making restitution is you adding to the scriptures. Jesus said repent and believe the gospel. He didn’t say repent, go make it right and then believe the gospel. You are adding to the scriptures.
@@Chris.A.H Luke 10: 8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold. 9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.
Finny, at 33:30 you're saying some of your closest friends are living in remarriage, one minute later you're saying scripture is crystal clear about not communing with someone who is sexually immoral or an adulterer, how does that work?
He could have meant not communing in the sense of not eating or taking communion with them. I have some friends from the past who I talk to every now and then but I don’t eat with them and I certainly don’t take communion with them. I’ve read that the early church would not allow communion to the sexual immoral and would bar them from fellowship within the church.
I have a few questions that don’t make sense to me from this teaching: 1) I am curious why Matthew 19 is not referenced or addressed at all. Which is the primary passage of “exception” for anything regarding remarriage. Jesus here specifically mentions what looks like a exception to “marry another” due to fornication/adultery. Do you have another video on this? 2) Adultery always would lead to death of the adulterous spouse in Hebrew/Jewish culture since it is a capital crime, thus, always freeing the victim to be free to remarry. Why would that no longer be so? Thanks for a response, Andrew
Grace to you brothers and sisters in Christ I (like most Christians today) got so caught up in "grounds for divorce" that I missed the simplicity of Jesus' response to the Pharisees question in Matthew 19:3. My thinking (like so many others) was that in some way the divorce must be illegitimate in order for adultery to ensue. This is a common presumption among Pastors and part of their argument for explaining why adultery occurs. So the general way of approaching this issue is to separate the reasons you can divorce from the reasons you can't. Following the presupposition that Jesus' response was addressing "grounds for divorce" many Pastors (and their adherents) think of divorce as ineffective if those grounds are not meet. This is why they postulate the phrase "still married in God's sight" which (for them) psychologically cancels the divorce if there wasn't grounds for it. When Christians believe that divorced individuals are "still married in God's sight", they then question the legitimacy of remarriage. As a matter of fact there is a view that has a whole scale position against remarriage at all. They actually believe Jesus prohibited remarriage. They even vilify remarriage by stating that "remarriage is adultery". A common but false misnomer!! Consequently those who understand divorce in God's Word as ending a marriage is tasked with the impossibility of convincing them that those remarried after divorce are actually married to their present spouse and NOT their former. Does this dilemma sound familiar to you in the back and forth debate among believers? So, would the confusion on this issue be eliminated if Jesus' conclusion about the ensuing adultery was about lawful divorce and remarriage? In other words, what if the ensuing adultery comes about because the first marriage truly ends when divorced? What if that is the VERY point Jesus is making, that the divorce concession given to Israel carried the consequence of causing them to inadvertently commit adultery when remarried. Would Christians then realize that the line of reasoning about 'grounds" and "divorce being ineffective" is errant? My perspective on Jesus' teaching changed when I realized He had actually circumvented the Pharisees question and instead choose to reveal that when divorce was conceded, an inadvertent transgression ensued. In Jesus' response the adultery is real, the divorce is a real divorce and the next marriage is an actual marriage. Jesus is making an observation based in biblical history where remarriage was allowed under the law after divorce was conceded (as the law of Deut. 24 verse 2 reveals). He is drawing His conclusion about the ensuing adultery from those facts. There's a simple reason why this way of committing adultery ensued and if you actually understand why, you'll also understand why it was not punished. In verse 8 Jesus is contrasting divorce conceded over against marriage created for life. He wanted His covenant people to realize that there is a consequence to ending a marriage, even for the party that didn't do the divorcing. Something significate in God's creative design for marriage is forfeited in the process of divorce and remarriage. Jesus was simply making the observation that if you do not sustain a marriage then God's creative design for marriage cannot be maintained, particularly when remarried. The one flesh with only one person for life principle (mentioned in verses 4-6) is inadvertently violated. It's really that simple!! Blessings
Appreciate your teaching but at the 43 minute mark when you speak about people that are in second marriages should not stay married, what if there is a child or children that they have had together that is so sad.
Grace to you In Jesus' teaching on this issue He was merely revealing to Israel that the divorce concession given to them (Matthew 19:8) carried the consequence of causing them to transgress the one-flesh with one person for life principle of verses 4-6 when remarried. Thus the inadvertent adultery that ensued from violating an obligation intrinsic to marriage. It was NOT a transgression of the law, it was a transgression based in God's design for marriage (8b). Two different ways of committing adultery!!!!!!!!!! The "one-flesh with one person for life" obligation could not be sustained from divorce conceded unless God acted to prohibit remarriage, which He did NOT. The law of Deuteronomy 24 which represented God's Will reveal's marriage was graciously allowed. Outside of admonishing them to stop separating the one-flesh union in verse 6 (to remedy the inadvertent adultery), Jesus instructed NOTHING else. That is a "before the facts" solution. Only Moses gave "after the fact" instruction to divorce and remarriage. There is NO leaving one's current marriage in God's Word for this way of committing adultery. That's because it was unintentional, given the facts that remarriage was graciously allowed after divorce was conceded (Deuteronomy 24:2). Blessings
I’m living in this sin currently. I dont know what to do. I am in a second marriage and I have 2 small children with my current husband. My first husband was very wicked and we had no children. I have no skills, money or place to go if we lived apart.
Just curious. I spent much of my life as a criminal and have no way to pay back these ppl. The thief on the cross could do it either. I think u think we can earn God's favour.
May I ask a question. If a man and woman divorce because the wife committed adultry, and then they want to recincile....Is that permissable since the couple does not live in the land of Israel?
Excellent talk! Please would you do one on the other exception clause verse Matt 19 v 9? Also, 2 questions..If a couple wishes to repent of an adulterous remarriage is it O.k to still live together still but in celibacy? Is it just the physical intimacy that is the adulterous aspect?
@@josephrobi6806 That isn't what it says in verse 15. It says she is no longer bound in servitude, but she is still BOUND until death in verse 39. NO remarriage is allowed and is ongoing adultery.
Jacqueline, the Bible says that there isn't supposed to be even an appearance of adultery, so you would want to obey the will of the Father- Matthew 7:21-23. Some people that I have talked to have tried to stay living as a brother and sister in the Lord with no hugging, touching, kissing etc., but it rarely works since there is the temptation to sin.
Great teaching on MDR! America is suffering with a serious sin problem. The hypocritical church points it's finger at the world's sin, but fails to recognize sin within its own walls. Judgement begins at the house of God!
I heard that adultery in the bible meant when a woman was bethrothed, engagement period, and found to not be a virgin or had sex with someone. THis was Jewish culture.
@@josephrobi6806 how many times does one have to address.....it is bondage, not bound....another term.......which had just been used.....do you think the writer forgot that....
I am interested in people who follow the idea that they have to divorce if they are in a remarriage with a divorced person and think that they have to get out of the relationship and have children and a happy home. I spent 18 years with a guy who cheated on me and used me. I was blessed not to have children with him since he was also bipolar. I am now in a loving marriage and have a child and stepchild and growing stronger in my faith. So to do the “right” thing, I am supposed to break up my family and struggle to raise my child and loose my stepson as well? I have a hard time believing that this is God’s idea for a loving family. My children are still living at home and my stepson has already gone through two divorces with his mom. Sure it is hard dealing with an ex and divorce, but any relationship can be difficult at times. Where’s the two wrongs make a right here. To me this seems somewhat like an excuse to get out of a relationship. I kept hoping that the speaker would address this type of situation. I made a mistake the first time around and still tried to do the whole life thing. I feel that now I got it right and God brought me and my husband for a reason and we wish that we could have been each other’s first, but are each other’s lasts. Thoughts?
Grace to you Debbie Jesus' teaching on this issue is much more simple then the interpretation of someone else's interpretation given by Finny in this message. Jesus is literally referring to the termination of one marriage (when He speaks of divorce) and literally the constitution of a second marriage (when He says "marries another"). EVERYTHING He concludes He is drawing from the writings of Moses. The law of Deuteronomy 24 reveals that divorce ended one marriage and the second marriage was a marriage that one was then bound. As you can tell from that text the former husband who repudiated his wife was NOT allowed to remarry her IF in the intervening time she had remarried. In Jesus' teaching on this issue He is merely revealing to Israel that the divorce concession given to them (Matthew 19:8) carried the consequence of causing them to transgress the one-flesh with one person for life principle of verses 4-6 when remarried. Thus the inadvertent adultery that ensued from violating an obligation intrinsic to marriage. It was NOT a transgression of the law, it was a transgression based in God's design for marriage (8b). Two different ways of committing adultery!!!!!!!!!! The "one-flesh with one person for life" obligation could not be sustained from divorce conceded unless God acted to prohibit remarriage, which He did NOT. The law of Deuteronomy 24 which represented God's Will reveal's marriage was graciously allowed. Outside of admonishing them to stop separating the one-flesh union in verse 6 (to remedy the inadvertent adultery), Jesus instructed NOTHING else. That is a "before the facts" solution. Only Moses gave "after the fact" instruction to divorce and remarriage. There is NO leaving one's current marriage in God's Word for this way of committing adultery. That's because it was unintentional, given the facts that remarriage was graciously allowed after divorce was conceded (Deuteronomy 24:2). Blessings
@@nealdoster8556 thank you for your response. I didn’t think or feel that breaking up a second marriage such as mine was right, but I like to see evidence from the Word for that feeling and line of thought. I believe that God shows us in His own time what is truth and we shouldn’t lean on our own understanding. I do remember the verse from Deuteronomy, and know someone who actually was disfellowshipped for returning to a first husband after marrying two others. Just needed the reminder of that text. The Word is full of gems that can’t all be collected with one reading and to think that we know them all is foolishness. May we keep sharing those that we find with others. God bless you as well.
@@debbiekaebirge-coitan1372 Please hear me out & dont be deceived. If you read Luke 16:18 it is pretty straightforward on this, as it states "Everyone who divorces his wife & marries another commits adultery, & he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery", ESV version. It still translates the same in the KJV & NLT. If you & your partner were both married before & your ex spouses are still alive, you are unfortunately in adultery & would have to leave one another in order to repent. Also read Roman's 7:2-3 pertaining to a woman remaining single or reconciling with her FIRST husband. May God bless you in this truth
Thank you for tackling such a difficult subject. Is it permissible for a Christian brother who has been divorced by his wayward (unbelieving?) wife to marry a woman whose husband has died?
Joseph Robi Having been in this situation myself, I research very much into that passage. What I discovered is the type of freedom they are referring to is freedom from my responsibilities of serving my husband, doulas. It is not referring to freedom to go and marry whomever I wish, as long as my first valid covenant marriage partner is still alive. My vow to God was, as long as we both shall live. Neither Jesus nor the New Testament, Neither apostles nor their disciples in the early church interpreted as the freedom to go and marry again, while your first Marriage partner is still alive. May we be we faithful and live holy lives!
Being married to a divorcee (my wife), this is a very very hard teaching. In order for me to enter into the Kingdom of God, I will have to divorce my wife. Which will in turn leave our 3 kids bouncing back and forth between two households. She (my wife) will probably re-marry again, meaning there will be another male figure around my children (at least half the time), god knows who. Are you sure this would be the right thing to do in my situation? Please be bold enough to give answer?
God doesn’t see you marriage to her as a marriage, God sees it as sin. To divorce your wife would be repentance from sin. Here is a link to help answer some questions you may have..... cadz.net/
The Word of God is clear that all the passages were answering in context of the law. That is why Jesus leaves off men divorced by their wives and also woman married to divorced men. It’s why Paul’s example in Romans 7 says to those that know the law and then goes on to talk of women being bound. It’s why it is said that men who are deacons are to be the husband of one wife (bc some believers were not) . It’s why in I Corinthians 7 Paul says a woman should remain unmarried or reconcile if she departs but he tells the husband just not to divorce her. He repeats this again right after the first mention! In I Corinthians 7:39 he also says again that a woman is bound. Why on earth would anyone want to dismiss all of these facts? You can’t dump the pronouns. Do you make the Bible gender neutral? These things were said in direct contrast to each other. It matters! And it’s why some people are falling into this false marriage doctrine.
Amaranth : Its amusing to me how people try and justify sin of adultery, and to see them explain away and try and do so theological gymnastics around what the Bible clearly teaches about the permanency of marriage for LIFE, UNTILL DEATH! As Jesus would say, “Have you not read?????” (One flesh, what God has joined together man cannot unjoin) Mathew 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. Mark 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.👈🏽 Luke 16 15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. 16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. 17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. 18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: 👉🏼and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.👈🏽
In the beginning they were also virgins! THAT is the true way that God intends this NOT your partial version! Sin entered the world and now both may not come to be exactly as planned!
He was incredibly clear, and especially at the very end his emphatic answer that if in a remarriage it must be repented of and ended, was the absolute truth.
Walking by the Spirit Always He believe working salvation. Work plus the cross. About the remarriage see 1 cor. 7:15 and 27-28 mix marriage totally different than 1cor 7:10 and verse 39 who are Christians couple who cannot remarried
@@josephrobi6806 Works AFTER being born again DO matter- Dear friends, you always followed my instructions when I was with you. And now that I am away, it is even more important. WORK HARD to show the results of your salvation, obeying God with deep reverence and fear. For God is working in you, giving you the desire and the power to do what pleases him. Do everything without complaining and arguing, so that no one can criticize you. Live clean, innocent lives as children of God, shining like bright lights in a world full of crooked and perverse people. Hold firmly to the word of life; then, on the day of Christ’s return, I will be proud that I did not run the race in vain and that my work was not useless. But I will rejoice even if I lose my life, pouring it out like a liquid offering to God, just like your faithful service is an offering to God. And I want all of you to share that joy. Yes, you should rejoice, and I will share your joy. Philippians 2:12-18
So I should divorce my amazing, loving, godly husband, and go remarry a man who was physically mentally and spiritually abusive, who would punish me if i went to church, who told me how he was going to kill both of us, who would choke me until I was about to pass out? I thought it was God who orchestrated an incredible sequence of events to get me out of there and put my God- loving parents there to support me in escaping his hell.... really.
You don’t need to be reconciled to your first husband, but The scriptures are clear that you would be in adultery. And your current husband as well because he’s married to a divorced woman whose first husband is still living. Hard pills to swallow. But if you remain in it then you and your godly husband perish.
I think it is worth noting that the Shepherd of Hermas was one of the most highly respected works among the earliest Christians, a work of allegory, and part of its insight is that divorce does have a last-resort use, and that it is the same for both men and women. It is to be used as family discipline when all else fails, when a spouse is in unrepentant adultery, just as excommunication is used by the Church--and for the same purpose. Not acting when one knows of the sin and there is a refusal to repent, Hermas's heavenly character explains, means being a sharer in the sin. This isn't a novel concept. The Bible describes God as divorcing Israel, for exactly the same cause and with exactly the same purpose--for repentance and restoration--despite having declared that He hates divorce. He never goes and marries another nation instead. Remarriage is never an option or consideration. While Jesus' example is of a man putting away his wife, the example in 1 Cor. 7 is of a wife feeling compelled to leave her husband, either remaining unmarried or being reconciled.
I know someone putting their eternal destiny, in the teaching, of John Piper....that says, if you are already remarried, albeit against the teaching of Scripture.....repent....and remain, in that relationship.....
if this πορνεία were of a Joseph and Mary situation, it would not be such of an issue.....meaning that once the covenant has been established, this would no longer be an issue, and no contradiction between this and the other texts, on this topic...
Can a woman marry a divorced man. If his first wife committed adultery ( and so did he which is what lead the 1st wife to cheat) and the woman he wants as his second wife has never been married and has no children.
John Piper has a strong teaching, but then retracts by saying if you are already divorced and remarried, stay in that relationship......he folded, at the end......
If so all three men are great bible expositors. All of them realize that the bible doesn't teach for those remarried to divorce their present spouse. Transgressing the current marriage does not resolve this issue.
@@philipbuckley759 So you say but Jesus said "marries another" which obviously refers to being married to another!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jesus was Not speaking in pretense Philip and you do not interpret Christ from the history to which He refers.
if someone is divorced and remarried, with no Biblical backing, that relationship is not a marriage, but adultery.....and not only would it be permissible, but necessary to leave, because it is adultery....and that is usually done, via a divorce...
if one marrys a divorced woman, and as such the relationship, is adultery, then it is not a real marriage....and yes, not only would one be able to leave this, they would be required to....to effect a repentance.....
Grace to you Stephanie Your question starts from the presupposition that remarriage wasn't allowed after divorce. Start instead with the biblical fact that remarriage was allowed as the law of Deuteronomy 24 verse 2 reveals. Jesus' teaching on this issue should be interpreted congruous with that truth. Not as if Jesus disagreed with Moses or the law or that He prohibiting remarriage Himself. Follow the biblical facts on this issue chronological, not by teaching that randomly selects scriptures to build an errant view. Blessings
Elizabeth J Drake was it a first marriage or widowed for you both? If so, I am so sorry! But if you, like my fake “ex”, actually had a first covenant spouse already (or your partner did) than the marriage you speak of was a fake even if your first spouse left you and you had no kids together. I know because my fake ex goes around to churches speaking of her “stand” for my return to her and our uncovenant 5 kids together. These churches are the kind that believe marriages are only covenant if between believers or between a believer and an unsaved spouse that has stayed with them. So you can see how I try to carefully give my sympathy. As I said I will be in tears if your marriage is covenant.😞 but I rejoice that it ended if it was not.
Anders Erichsen , Well, that fornication would be sin, but there is no marriage covenant seen by God. Sex alone does not make a marriage. If there is no living previous spouse, that person would be free to marry. Though they should repent of, and ask God to forgive them for that past fornication.
Tragically the world has got into the Church! It is mainly not being taught because it is an emotive subject and so many in this situation - even many Pastors being M, D & R! Just after I first got saved I really sense the Holy It's not about our happiness but walking in holiness! We have to interpret the unclear verses in the Bible in the light of the clear ones and so many take the Matthew 19v9 exception clause as the excuse for divorce and remarriage. Christians are to follow Jesus - love your neighbour/spouse. If we do not forgive others He will not forgive us. Where is the 'for better or worse etc' vows made before God! I read that statistically there are more divorces and remarriage within the church than amongst the unsaved! We need strong marriages and teaching on it in the church to be a strong witness for this lost world. John Baptist lost his head for telling Herod it was not 'lawful' to have Herodias. IF it was a case of just repenting Herod could just say sorry and carry on but the Greek is present continuous (I read). Repentance is turning away from the adulterous relationship not to continue living in it. IF a homosexual gets saved, they do not just repent and stay in that relationship as it's sinful, just as is adultery
If a couple never marries civilly or religiously, are they safe, or is that even worse? If a man marries a woman who has had a child out of wedlock, and then marries someone else how is that looked upon? If a man fathers child/children out of wedlock and then marries someone else, how is that looked upon?
This is why virginity is actually the seal of marriage and marrying and claiming to be a virgin (since only virgin wives were taken back then to mother the true heirs)... not a virgin was a sin unto death back then and also why taking a girls virginity compelled the man caught to marry the girl unless the father said no. But I know we need to live by the SPIRIT and not the letter So I am just saying this as something we need to consider and pray about The blood shed actually represents the blood of Jesus “We enter into the holiest of holies by the blood of Jesus” Study it out... Heaven views virginity HIGH importance It’s not religious It’s all about Jesus 😭and our covenant with HIM It’s worship But, we are to be led BY THE HOLY SPIRIT OF TRUTH not the letter Jesus said “what therefore GOD hath joined together” What is viewed as fornication by GOD THE FATHER that the world and even the two making the vows in immaturity or foolishness or ignorance about the other... that all others view as marriage? What does GOD THE FATHER uphold? Where does HE have mercy? But also there is Gal 3:15 HE wants us to walk in integrity Rambling... We need to dicern this Help me Jesus please help us all John 17
So, if a single man married a divorced woman, then she committed adultery(cheated on her current spouse) and they got divorced, Is it still sin for that man to get remarried?
@@philipbuckley759 The concessions Finney is talking about were given because of hardness of heart. The concessions wouldn't be taken away without a change of heart that would make adherence to the command possible.
So what about abuse? There are countries where women are forced to marry men that are twice their age and are extremely abusive both mentally and physically... if that woman gets the privilege of obtaining a divorce should she not remarry if she finds someone who truly loves her?
No. Read about Jacob's daughter, Dinah, in Genesis. She was raped by the prince of the land. Jacob insisted the prince marry Dinah as was his just duty because she could now marry no other. The womb is sacred and once penetrated is in union through a blood covenant with the one who penetrated it. This covenant is reflective of the union of Christ and His bride. In all reality the union of man and woman is a parable of this. Christ Himself, as well as Paul, encouraged us to not marry, I believe, because the purity of the union has been so corrupted that it is a serious danger for us to enter into such a challenging covenant without falling into adultery. Our covenant is first and foremost with Him. Our Savior came through a virgin just as His church must be born through the same purity by the Spirit. In fact, we are warned not to make any covenants, not because making such a covenant is a sin but because the risk of falling into sin is great. that is why I will not enter into any contractual agreement, especially one where man forces his own law on it outside the law of God. God has given this world over to its own rebellious ways and we must not confuse our morality with His. His ways are greater than our ways. What was once a blessing and gift to mankind we have twisted into a horrible, prodigal beast. So now we who are in this world, but are not of this world, must stand strong in our covenant with our God. While we are here we will be refined as silver is purified, tried as gold is tried, and threshed and sifted as wheat in the harvest of souls.
NO FORCED MARRIAGE IS VALID BEFORE GOD OR PEOPLE WHO MARRY IN SATANIC RITUALS YES THESE WOMEN HAVE A RIGHT TO REMARRY VOLUNTARILY BUT BY THEIR OWN SOBER VOLITION ONLY IN THE LORD DRUNKEN LAS VEGAS MARRIAGES ARE NOT VALID MARRIAGES BEFORE GOD GODLY MARRIAGES AND LEGAL MARRIAGES CONFLICT ONLY GOD CAN MAKE TWO ONE FLASH AND ONLY GOD CAN SEPARATE THEM
@@ronduckett8706 swears to there own hurt, and changes not. God is holy and good word is settled forever in the heavens. Quite out of reach of man's wisdom and ways. Blessed are those who take refuge in him.
Thanks for this clear and noncompromising teaching, I wholeheartedly agree. I have just one question that becomes pretty important in this matter. When do man and woman become one flesh? How do I know if someone was already married? What God has joined together let no man separate, but when does God do the joining?
They become one flesh when it is consummated. Issac and Rebekah. But we still have to follow the Law of the land and be legally married first. God does the joining when we wholeheartedly seek HIS choice for us, not a spouse of our own choosing.
@@kateleurs5012 arranged by the parents? And or mistakes made in our youth? Either way and from what Father has done in my life, the foundational scripture is "what God ordains let no man break asunder". He can correct mistakes as we seek Him and truth, fully surrendered to Him but we must follow His leading and not take action based on our own understanding.
For those who want to use Duet 24 (Moses Law) for divorce and forbidding remarriage to first spouse. Jesus House vs Moses House: Wherefore holy brethren partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, CHRIST JESUS (2) Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also MOSES was faithful in all his house. (3) For this man was counted worthy of more glory than MOSES inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.(4) For every house is builded by some man but he that built ALL things is GOD. (5) And Moses verily was faithful in ALL his house as a servant for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; (6) BUT CHRIST AS A SON OVER HIS OWN HOUSE; WHOSE HOUSE ARE WE, IF WE HOLD FAST WITH CONFIDENCE AND THE REJOICING OF THE HOPE FIRM UNTO THE END.
Christ says do not think I come to destroy the laws or the prophets right? Deuteronomy 24"1-4, it specifically says the first husband divorced her for some indecency, then she may go and become another man's wife. His command is she must not go back to the first, and the first husband must not take her back after that she has been defiled right? You didn't even say anything about Moses command. And today hearts are still hard. Jesus express in Mathew 5:32 the ideal for marriage, he was expressing the ideal not overruling Moses. That's why he gives the exception for divorce and remarry which is the same thing Moses did. In Mark and Luke is basically saying the general idea of marriage. 1 Corinthians 7:27,28, Paul is saying the same thing art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife, but if thou marry, thou has not sinned. This sentence is specifically says if you divorced and remarry you have not sinned. All on the same accord Amen brother!!!
Since you are quoting Paul in Corinthians, don't overlook what he says ,once a person has divorced, remain SINGLE, if you want to remarry, remarry your first spouse. This is a commandment.. in other scripture it says you cannot go back to your first spouse if they went and married, divorced someone else, then they cannot remarry them because they are greatly polluted. When Paul says ,if they do get married they are not sinning. He is speaking of virgins marrying. Paul wouldn't contradict himself in the same sentence.
1 Corinthians 7:27,28 is not about virgins. Cause he didn't say it's for virgins. He's saying the same thing Moses said and what Jesus said. You just don't want to believe that Jesus did give an exception for divorce and remarry. Anyway this book was written by men and not by Jesus or his apostles. This book was written two hundred years after the death of Joshua and the apostles. The apostles were illiterate couldn't read or write. So they didn't write anything in the Bible. And also the ancient tablets scripts tells a different story than what the Roman's wrote in the Bible. Know your history people...❤
the term is fornication....as sex, out of the marriage bond, has its own term....adultery....which would allow the marriage covenant to be broken....and contradict both Mark, and Luke....
if one is in ....an adulterous marriage, then it is not a marriage, in the sight, of God, therefore it needs to be terminated....and that probably would be achieved, by a divorce...
Sorry , wrong answer. The exception is found in the Book of Mathew and Mathew as you may know was written with a Jewish audience in mind. The Jewish culture of those days practiced a very strict form of courtship, ( Joseph and Mary ) where if during this courtship one of the two would commit adultery, hence fornication, they would need to formally dissolve the relationship similar to divorce. So being that we in our modern western culture don't practice this kind of courtship, the exception clause does not pertain to us in our modern societies.
I dont think women were left out in the streets when they were put away in those times. Most cases they were actually sent back to their parents. Its the father that would have had to give her up for marriage in the first place,so she would be returned to her fathers home.
The key to interpreting Jesus' teaching on divorce is understanding that you SHOULD interpret Him from the biblical precedents to which He refers in a congruous manner, NOT as if Jesus disagreed with the law or Moses. Jesus does NOT actually answer the loaded question the Pharisees asked Him in verse 3 of Matthew 19 about lawful grounds for divorce. The very reason that question was difficult to answer (then and now) was because the law did NOT give grounds for divorce, it merely regulated it. The question was issue to Jesus merely to cause Him to be in conflict with the law itself. It was a trick question, one that Jesus did NOT fall for. Jesus (knowing the heart and intent of the Pharisees) instead chose to reveal what ending a marriage prematurely (divorce) causes for the next marriage. If you interpret Jesus from the biblical precedents to which He refers, those divorced and remarried do NOT remain one flesh to one spouse for life. They become one flesh with their present spouse which violates (in principle) God's creative design in the origin. That's the catch 22 that allows one to understand the simplicity of Jesus' teaching on this matter. The key to understanding Jesus is in verse 8 where He contrast divorce conceded over against marriage created for life. To understand the main point Jesus is making is to accept the fact that when one marriage ends (before death), fidelity for life cannot be sustained when remarried. The paradox is real and can be understood if you accept the fact that remarriage was graciously allowed following divorce, but being one flesh with one person for life is inadvertently transgressed circumstantially. Speaking to and about the divorce concession, Jesus is directly revealing what transpires by one marriage being supplanted by another. Conversely He did not teach that the first marriage "survived" or the one flesh union wasn't separated, or the original "covenant" was still binding for those remarried. You CANNOT divest "divorce" and "marries another" (spoken by Jesus) of meaning without INVERTING and exaggerating His teaching. Blessing
But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?"
NONSENSE!!! If an unsaved person gets remarried and then comes to Christ afterwards. His sin is forgiven and he does not have to dissolve his marriage and become single in order to show true repentance. That is complete nonsense.
read Matthew 5......if one divorces a spouse, without Biblicals grounds, it makes him to be responsible for his wifes adultery.....hmmm...no provision, here for that innocent party..
Many believe that sex makes you one flesh. God makes you one flesh, not sex. Think about Adam and Eve. God took Adam's rib and made Eve. So they were of the same (one) flesh. Later Adam "knew" (sex) his wife and she conceived.
The Word of God is clear that all the passages were answering in context of the law. That is why Jesus leaves off men divorced by their wives and also woman married to divorced men. It’s why Paul’s example in Romans 7 says to those that know the law and then goes on to talk of women being bound. It’s why it is said that men who are deacons are to be the husband of one wife (bc some believers were not) . It’s why in I Corinthians 7 Paul says a woman should remain unmarried or reconcile if she departs but he tells the husband just not to divorce her. He repeats this again right after the first mention! In I Corinthians 7:39 he also says again that a woman is bound. Why on earth would anyone want to dismiss all of these facts? You can’t dump the pronouns. Do you make the Bible gender neutral? These things were said in direct contrast to each other. It matters! And it’s why some people are falling into this false marriage doctrine.
The context is the law. It is even seen when we see that bishops are to be the husband of one wife. That is the qualification For one in leadership. What of the other men?
The bible says no one should marry a divorced woman. The bible does not state that no one should marry a divorced man. Actually, the man does not need to divorce his wife to remarry - he can marry two or more if he pleases, as long as both women are not divorced and he is not planning to be a leader in church. The burden is placed on men 1. Not to divorce their wives except for adultery and not to marry divorced women. No where is a man who is already married and marries an unmarried woman called an adulterer. I am a woman, I hate it but that's what the bible states.
@@philipbuckley759 so you keep saying yet plenty of modern scholars with more manuscripts than Erasmus could even dream of agree fornication as an illicit unlawful or sinful sex “only before a marriage not after” concept is fundamentally wrong.
@@patriciarowland8230 Grace to you Patricia I agree with your sentiments, especially if you been taught that Christians should overlook the fact that God did not require those divorced to remain single for the rest of their life. If you start with the truth that God under the law allowed remarriage after divorce (Deuteronomy 24:2) you will have the proper basis for understanding Jesus' teaching on the matter. That's because everything Jesus concluded was derived from the writings of Moses. Everything Jesus' concluded was relevant to Israel historically. So yes Jesus did reveal divorce has a consequence. Jesus did reveal that ending a marriage before death (inadvertently) causes one to commit adultery against their former spouse when remarried (Mark 10:11). But He said that in light of the fact that remarriage was graciously allowed under the law, understand? Jesus is not speaking in a vacuum, He was directly speaking to Israel's history where divorce was conceded (Matthew 19:8) and remarriage allowed, understand? Yes divorce has a consequence for both parties but Jesus is careful to explain that the husband who repudiates his wife is culpable for the adultery she is caused to commit, why? Because under the law he was releasing her with the right of remarriage. If he had not divorced her she would have avoided committing adultery this way. That is why Jesus blames him and not her, understand? This way of committing adultery was not punished because it was unintentional and one should NEVER make the mistake that it is the same thing as being unfaithful while married (which was punished). Blessings
Remarriage - An Adulterous Lifestyle 💔 Much as divorce is sinful, remarriage following divorce is yet more sinful. It is a step 🚶♀️ further against the moral laws of God. The Scriptures consistently describe remarriage while a person's partner lives as adultery. Consider the following verses: "And he saith unto them Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery" (Mark 10:11, 12). "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and Whosoever marrieth her who is put away doth commit adultery" (Mathew 19:9). "Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and Whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery" ( Luke 16:18). "So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man" (Romans 7:3). These Scriptures consistently describe remarriage as adultery. The Greek verb tense translated "committeth adultery" shows present continuous action, suggesting not simply an act of adultery, but a practice of adultery. The verse in Romans likewise shows that while a person's partner lives, remarriage is not a valid marriage👎, but an adulterous condition. There is an act of adultery- the sin of sexual union while married to another. There is also the condition of adultery - the sin of a marriage relationship with another while one's true 💑 marriage partner is living. With such clear Scriptures, why would professing Christians ✝️ 🤔 attempt to justify divorce and remarriage? One lady who herself married a divorced man and later denounced her situation as an adulterous union described her downfall. REASONING is one of satan's 😈 most effective weapons. How easy 😏 to reason away obedience to the Word of God. The eternal purpose ✨ 💛 of this life is not so much that we should be happy but that we should be holy. Yet there can be no true happiness apart from righteous living... "I fasted and prayed 🙏 a great deal, seeking God for an answer directly from Himself. But, although I sought a word from Him, no word was given. Nothing. Complete 🔕 silence. Only later did it come home to me that it is vanity seek a rhema (utterance) from God when He has already so clearly spoken in the written Word. Yes, a word may come which contradicts what He has said in the Scriptures; but that word 🤔 comes from the wrong source 😈. It is impossible to remarry with integrity while one's partner is still living. The treacherous spirit which leads to divorce is the same spirit which leads one to remarry. It is a betrayal 😔. In marriage , 💑 one can give his commitment to his partner, but in remarriage one can give only his treachery and 💔 broken trust. - Christian Family Living, pgs 173-175, John Coblentz.
@@patriciarowland8230 Grace to you Patricia Did you notice in the post left by "SetApartOne" that he or she didn't explain those scriptures within CONTEXT, but rather gave an interpretation from fear? That particular interpretation is what I call "the exaggerated view" because it randomly selects scriptures to build that interpretation with false suppositions added to it. That interpretation doesn't explain Jesus' teaching on this issue from the Biblical history to which He referred. Randomly selecting scriptures can build ANYTHING theoretically, right? Conversely if you follow the chronological facts you will properly understand this issue. For instance, did you know that when Jesus spoke to this issue He wasn't referring to any New Testament scriptures at all? None existed at that time and that is why it is important to KNOW the Biblical facts as they happen in Biblical history. EVERYTHING Jesus concluded was derived from the writings of Moses. EVERYTHING He concluded should be understood in harmony with those inspired scriptures. You SHOULD interpreted Jesus and Moses congruous and NOT as if Jesus was opposing the law. Any Christian who knows God's Word knows God is both Holy and Gracious. Fortunately when divorce was conceded (as Jesus mentions in Matthew 19:8) God acted in GRACE. He didn't prohibit remarriage after divorce (as some falsely believe). When you say "Divorce is worse than death" you are expressing the sentiment of someone who has been subjected to the teaching represented in the post left by "SetApartOne", right? That sentiment would have been the exact same way all the Old Testament women would have felt if God had prohibited them from marriage after being repudiated by their husband. Fortunately God responded by allowing them to remarry. You shouldn't interpret Jesus' teaching on this issue "as if" He was opposing the Father or Moses or the law, understand? Be careful of all the false suppositions interjected into Jesus' teaching because they generate fear instead of objectively understanding Jesus. If you KNOW the Biblical facts Jesus was referring to then you can determine that all those women were caused to commit adultery (Matthew 5:32) because their husbands (who controlled divorce under that social construct) did NOT love them as they should. When divorcing them the husband was releasing his wife with the right of remarriage. Unfortunately ending a marriage before death causes one to commit adultery against their former spouse when remarried (Mark 10:11). That was Jesus' point. He gave them a reason to stay married but He didn't prohibit marriage, nor contradict the Father, Moses, or the law. The interpretation of "SetApartOne" wants you to believe Jesus prohibited remarriage (which would contradict Biblical history), but that is FALSE also. There is NO prohibition for remarriage in Jesus' teaching. Look for yourself. You have to interject FALSE suppositions into Jesus' teaching to believe that. There is NO prohibition for remarriage in Biblical history until we get to Paul's response to the questions submitted to him by the church of Corinth (1 Cor. 7:1). In the different circumstances he addressed he only restricts remarriage when a Christian woman divorces her Christian husband (1 Cor. 7:11). There she is instructed to reconcile or remain unmarried. That is the first and only time remarriage is prohibited after being divorced. If you just randomly select scriptures to build your view (instead of following Biblical facts chronologically) then you can claim that was a uniform prohibition for all circumstances as "SetApartOne" does. But the TRUTH is that prohibitions is UNIQUE, NOT uniform (as Biblical history reveals). Be careful that your mind is not plagued with extremes that FALSELY misrepresents both the Father, the Son as well as Paul. It seems to me your present understanding on this issue was formulated by the "exaggerated view". Hope you will come to understand this subject by the Biblical facts instead of the imposition of fear from false suppositions. Blessings
Hello, grace and peace to you. I am writing because this teaching does not add up. If you submit that a divorce is a sin but then continue with a line of reasoning that says if you have remarried again you should leave that marriage and repent and divorce again...well, that math doesn't work One sin (original divorce) + another sin ( which is your council to leave that situation and add another divorce) can not equate to redemption. Jesus never taught to get out of one sin you must sin again. Marriage is a holy invention and sacred creation and as such it should be handled with the utmost of care The strong assertion of the Lord in Mark 10:9 is that that no MAN should put asunder what God has joined. I humbly ask if that is not exactly what your council does here? This teaching at best is a stumbling block to dear brothers and sisters in Christ who might be struggling in their walk with the Lord and in their marriages. At worst this teaching has done exactly what the Lord cautioned NOT to do which is ending marriages. A careful study of first Corinthians 7 is prudent in this context. These words I write are meant as caution. How many marriages have ended because of this teaching? How many children are questioning why daddy left mommy and said it was because Jesus said to? What view of the Father does that premise teach? I commend you for not wanting to be wishy washy but I would add we must also stand for on absolute truth. Not my truth or yours but the Lord's truth alone. Therefore what God has joined let no man separate.
Romans 7:2-3 King James Version 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
If our conclusion is to be: the wife who is put away, by an unjust, cold hearted husband, absent of the sin of sexual infidelity, must remain unmarried, then the future of such a woman (especially in early times) is very bleak. With little or no way to provide financially for herself and/or children, the "innocent" woman and possibly her children, are without much hope. She would not, according to Paul, be eligible for financial support from the church's treasury, seeing that that is reserved for widows. A sad situation indeed.
@@philipbuckley759 I wonder if your presumed understanding of God will hasn't mislead you. I also wonder if you would have been numbered amongst the Pharisees who stood by and condemned Jesus's disciples when then pick and ate the grain on the Sabbath. God did make the rules governing the sabbath, didn't he? God also made the regulations concerning who was allowed to eat the showbread that was prepared and offered for use in the Temple, didn't he? I wonder if you would have condemned David and his followers as they ate the forbidden showbread in the temple? What was the reason for overlooking the letter of the law? God's understanding of human need?
According to some if you stay with a partner like remarried you can lose your salvation. That is not a good teaching because salvation is a gift not something to keep or retain at all cost. Ephesians 2:8-9
More on what the Bible teaches about divorce and remarriage. See also the first post below. 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. Jer 3:8 Yes, God divorced Israel for your adultery! ( later he divorced Judah as well ) Also did you know that God told the Israelites to divorce their pagan wives in Ezra? Yet there are men that will tell you God NEVER allows divorce under any circumstance. There is a lot of false teaching out there as Jesus said it would be (Matthew 24) and it not only comes from those who are blatantly easy to recognize, it also comes in the form of what people think Christianity should look like via the anabaptist type/kingdom people today. Denominational religions and most of the Mennonite, Amish, German Baptist, Kingdom (etc) groups all have false teachings in their theology. See links exposing them at the end of this post. One very dangerous teaching is that if a person was divorced prior to becoming a new creation in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 5), they teach that sin is not forgiven by God and a person must never marry anyone after conversion AND if they have, they are to divorce that person and some say, go back to the prior person. In this they and many other kingdom groups are hypocritical as they hold marriage is a life long bond that cannot be broken for ANY reason. But as we will show you, that is a lie or how else did God become divorced, why did God order it in Ezra or why did God ever allow divorce as He did with Moses? ( these same groups rightly reject "once saved always saved" because they say you can break your agreement/covenant with God for salvation yet they say a marriage ...which is a covenant... that can NEVER be broken ) They cannot have it both ways! Note: our stance is just as the Word instructs, we are against divorce if both parties are believers unless it be for fornication (Matthew 5:32). The other situation would be if an unbelieving couple married and one became a believer (born from above John 3:3) and the unbelieving spouse was not pleased to dwell with them and divorced them, they are not under bondage as per 1 Corinthians 7. Jesus in his teaching on divorce was speaking to the belieing Jews. This particular article is for those who have had divorce PRIOR to being a born again believer and made a new creation in Christ. So let's look at 1 Corinthians 7:8-11 and see if Paul addresses anyone who has been divorced prior to conversion. Note: Corinth was a cess pool of seuxal sin so divorced people were surely part of the NT body there. 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. 9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. 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 or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. The greek word for 'unmarried' is: agamos and it means 'unmarried'. Not married. In some cased, not married anymore. That means the person is not currently married. It does not mean 'never married' because let's look at verse 11. Paul just finishes instructing these born again believers that they are to stay married and the wife is not to depart from her husband…. 11 But if she depart, let her remain unmarried (agamos) In today's language that would mean 'divorced'. So verse 11 says if a woman who is married, (remember he's speaking to the born again believers) departs from her husband, let her remain 'unmarried/agamos' or be reconciled to her husband. So if a married woman departs from her husband, she is now agamos/unmarried/divorced. Didn't Paul just address the unmarried prior to that in verse 8. He said 'to the unmarried/agamos'...that would mean people who are not currently married and could have in their unregenerate state departed from their spouse, or been departed from. So let's look at all these verses together. 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. He is instructing the unmarried (those who could have been previously divorced) and widows that it's best not to marry. 9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. He gives those who are unmarried/agamos/divorced permission to marry. 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 (agamos/divorced) or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. He tells the born again believing wives and husbands not to depart or put the other away. So if it is a sin for a person who was divorced (put away or departed from) to remarry after conversion, then the theology of the plain people teaches that Paul (who was inspired by the Holy Spirit) is a liar. Note: they teach marriage is ALWAYS for life but that cannot be true as we showed God was divorced and even Jesus told the woman she had 5 husbands. How can this be if you can not have multiple marriages in a lifetime? Did Jesus lie? But back to the point here: It is a dangerous theology to teach people that if they have divorce in their past and they become born from above (John 3:3) that they must leave the spouse they are with whether it was a spouse before the conversion or after. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. (2 Corinthians 5:17) ALL THINGS ARE NEW. Hebrews 8 and Hebrews 10 tells us that He remembers our sins no more. So if a woman was divorced prior to conversion and a man marries her, he is not marrying a divorced woman, he is marrying a 'new creation' as in 2 Corinthians 5:17 God and Moses dealt with divorce as did Jesus and Paul. The truth is that it is not the unforgivable sin these groups have made it based on the situation of course, as we have explained. Note: After Jesus/Paul taught on divorce, there is no indication that people of that day then began to divorce there current husband or wife to go back to a past one. Imagine the turmoil. At 1 pm Tuesday, Jews could divorce and remarry per Moses law. Then at 2 pm that same day Jesus says, NO; so they all ran to divorce their current partners? No, it was not so! This is a man made false way so do not be deceived by it. These groups look past MANY sins but they hone in on divorce and remarriage like a pack of vultures as it is their pet doctrine as Pharisee's of the day! Do not be deceived by them! Below is a link for a book on what the Bible actually teaches about d & r. www.thefaithoncedelivered.info/Divorce.htm
The main problem with your objection, and that of the article you reference, is that the interpretations and claims used are ahistorical. At root, they take Moses _over_ Jesus and what He taught. Tell us this-what nation did God remarry instead of Israel if His divorce was for the purpose of alienation instead of discipline? As Paul explains, even in Israel it was always the children of promise, by faith, to whom the covenant was reckoned and it remains the same today. Your author gets himself into a corner with his theology, having to support other Mosaic rulings as well, from slavery to the treatment of female prisoners to polygamy to the stoning of rebellious children. I guess we have to thank modern secular law for preventing Christians like him from continuing such past behaviors expected in civil law. Jesus’ teaching, and that of the book of Hebrews, about the concessions to hard hearts and the greater perfection in “You have heard ... but I say”-the new covenant-cannot be countenanced in his reasoning. “Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one, ‘And to your Seed,’ who is Christ. And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.” “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.” Yet your author blasts an objection pointing out the faults of such rulings in the covenant as Jesus did-not because of God but because of fallen humanity. The earliest Christians never teach the position that he claims. They teach divorce as for the purpose of discipline and potential repentance / reconciliation only, just as God used it with Israel. The “unmarried” in 1 Cor. 7 with the right to marry are not those who are divorced with a living spouse. Paul specifies that the only two options for them are remaining single or reconciling with their spouse. Tertullian comments on this directly, saying that Paul was certainly not granting marriage to the divorced “in the teeth of the primary precept.” The teaching in this video was thought of then as a _primary precept_ in the Christian life, despite the disciples fiercely reacting to it as a very difficult teaching--as meaning that it is better not to marry. In my grandparents’ time, even in the mainstream churches, divorce and remarriage carried a lot of stigma. It no longer does. Much has changed quickly. Did the Bible change? Certainly not. (You are correct that a remarried spouse should not be taken back into a first marriage. The Scripture is explicit that this is an abomination to God, not man.)
Most in the remarriage camp, (which is most of Christianity today) cannot seem to find any scripture to support their remarriage position? They love to spiritualize scripture, contorting and distorting its plain teaching. The first law of hermeneutics, let scripture interpret scripture. The teachings of Jesus are clear on MDR, most just won't accept it. For the first 1500 years the early church fathers were all in agreement, as this Pastor is teaching. Remarriage after divorce is not allowed. God clearly states he hates divorce in Malachi 2. "For the Lord God of Israel says that he hates divorce, for it covers ones garment with violence."God desires Godly offspring, divorce and remarriage wrecks the family unit. This hard teaching, that remarriage is not allowed, as long as a covenant spouse is still alive, is rejected by most today, I believe because of hard hearts. John the Baptist, lost his head for this very teaching. Calling adulteress remarriages to account. 1st Corinthians 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom or God? Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. The only teaching that is in harmony with scripture on remarriage after divorce, not being adultery, is the death of a covenant spouse. One cannot remain in an adulterous remarriage as long as a covenant spouse is still alive. God forgives all sin that is repented of!
Malachi 2 is about divorcing a faithful spouse. That is treacherous. God desires a GODLY seed. Even God divorced with reason. John the Baptist never told Herod that he shouldn’t have divorced his wife. He said it was unlawful to have his brothers wife! That was the law! It was wrong to marry your living brothers wife. Incestual really. If John was making a new law then how would Herod have known he was disobeying??? It would have been new to him! It is not in the law! Do you are saying all people that were already divorced or remarried were automatically in sin. Chaos and not seen anywhere To one who says all remarriage after any first divorce is a sin taking you to hell: Jesus wasn’t making new laws. -Anymore than he told us to poke out our eyes. He was speaking to the heart of the issues. It’s why marrying a divorced man is MISSING from his words! You must stop picking what to use as a weapon from the Bible. How you judge is how you will be judged. One could just as easy say that no nonvirginal women can marry, going by Paul’s words and bc neither he or Jesus said they could. (Paul says in I Corinthians 7 that virgin and widowed women can marry and not sin. If we include the impure in the “unmarried “ then we must surely also include some divorced people because Paul used that SAME word to describe a woman who left her husband. Obviously, “unmarried can be a descriptive word for the divorced.) I think you also need to ask yourselves: were all divorced and remarried people automatically in sin when (you think) Jesus spoke this new doctrine? When (you think) John spoke it to Herod then how was Herod to have known before if it was just then spoken and not the law?? These severe marriage doctrines are a narrative that is not really seen in the Bible. There aren’t cases of people being told to leave their believing spouse and family and go back to their unsaved past to find an ex that left. Or telling the one that is married to a “remarried” person that they are actually free to leave and go get a new spouse. We must use discernment. Just as most can see that all killing is not murder; all remarriage after divorce is not sin. Anyone saying someone should leave their faithful spouse and they can go have another is not speaking to the heart of the issue. We aren’t to sin like that so that grace may abound. Use wisdom and don’t go cherry picking through the Bible to feel secure in false works that do not save.
Thank you!!!! I’ve taken a stand on this matter and have been under heavy scrutiny for it! I was told that I’m living in bondage and God wants us to be happy. I was taught that the innocent person can remarry and that I should let go of legalism and be open to revelation. Unfortunately the church I’m apart of have many who in a divorce and remarriage union including the Pastor. I’ve been told that I’m throwing away my life because 75% of the world is divorced. I told them I will gain life because I chose to obey God!
This dude is on point. Through him God has spoken clearly. Remarriage is sin if an existing spouse still has breath. He hit another point. We must stand and don’t be wishy washy. This spoke to me HARD. I am in a remarriage and I’m packing and leaving. My neighbors are professing believers in a remarriage. They scowl at me cause my wife told them I’m leaving. My other neighbors came to me trying to tell me I’m wrong and told me I have cheapened Gods grace. I put her in check but after the conversation I felt like Elijah running from Jezebel. Every time I go outside I hang my head ducking my neighbors feeling ashamed. Why should I be ashamed when I’m the one standing for truth. They should be ashamed for living in and calling evil good. I worked at a mega church and told the 3 pastors that married me my remarriage is sin. They told me recant or face disfellowship. I resigned. I’ve lost friends job and at times certain family members are against me. Yes if you stand for truth it will cost you. I feel alone. Hardly anyone but a few stand with me. But I press on. I encourage those who are experiencing the same to stand firm, hold your ground walk in truth no matter the cost. I will be celibate. No biggie cause I have everything I need in Jesus. Last time I checked sex is not a need. Jesus bless you all
WOW...what a story ! I will tell you , I have been divorced for 11 years and would like to share my life with someone but I have been very conflicted. i don't date because it almost always leads to sin....it is a very tuff road
Gary Farmer don’t date bro it will lead to sin. You have all you need in Jesus. It’s hard I know but keep holding on
GOD BLESS YOU BROTHER MY WIFE LEFT ME 23 YEARS AGO AND I HAVE BEEN SINGLE EVER SINCE IT IS STILL HEARTBREAKING BECAUSE MY WIFE MARRIED 2 MORE TIMES I STILL LOVE HER AND PRAY FOR HER MY HEART IS WITH YOU AND SO IS GOD YOU ARE RIGHTEOUS BEFORE THE LORD
Brother, my wife left me 8 years ago. And I will remain celibate or be reconciled for as long as she lives. Knowing this truth.
But what is going to happen to your second wife. This doesn't seem kind or nice.
Praise God for speaking the truth! Not many will receive these words. My heart grieves for all who are partaking in this sin. Thank You LORD for sparing me from becoming an adulteress with a divorced man. Reconcile or remain unmarried!
Today I was strong enough in my convictions in this teaching to share it with everyone I know.
Grace to you Shana
Do you realize your "convictions" start from suppositions that are errant?
For instance, Jesus didn't prohibit remarriage after divorce as "supposed".
I'm aware the Apostle Paul (many years later) gave a prohibition when answering the questions submitted to him my the church of Corinth (1 Cor. 7:1) under one of the situations he addressed, but that was unique and not uniform as you've been made to think.
If you don't follow biblical chronology then a random selection of scripture interpretation will cause you to bypass when remarriage was actually prohibited in God's Word and to what extent. Blessings
Just three days ago my sister in Christ sent me your video about head covering that's how know about you and I'm loving your teachings, No diluting the word of God, God bless you sir🙏🏾
Thank you for making this video. My wife left/divorced almost 8 years ago. The "clean pain/dirty pain" is absolutely true.
Only a literal death frees anyone to marry another. Otherwise it's merely adultery to be forsaken in repentance, in the eyes of God.
Read 1 Corinthians 7:15 unbelieving man leaving her for the world. That verse teaches us about God accepting remarried isn’t it?
@@josephrobi6806 no it is bondage....not about being bound....it is a different term with a different meaning.....as it is not about the covenant....but the relationship with the spouse....after all....marriage is not bondage....
Where does Paul say REMARRIAGE? Not there. You are adding it.
1 Cor 7:13-16 is about keeping peace between believer and unbeliever.
Believer don't leave!! But if unbeliever insists on leaving, let them go because "Blessed are the peacemakers" said Jesus in Matthew 5.
The believer remains alone.
@@philipbuckley759 Amen Philip. This guy is determined to believe that illegitimate remarriages are acceptable. He must be remarried or has someone close to him that is. He doesn’t have ears to hear. He just posted on my comment with his subversion of the truth. This fellow is deceived.
@@jesusstudentbrett AMEN AMEN. That part in the scripture about God calling us to peace so many overlook. Blows my mind. God is calling us to peace not Remarriage. If he wanted us to remarry he would have said so. It’s plain as the nose on one’s face. Folks will see and hear what they want to hear. I use to be one of them. Blind and deceived. They like I was won’t see unless God gives them sight. It will happen no other way.
I am a separated man, who is now single again and I must remain celibate. But I need to heal from other problems in my life. If I reconcile with my wife that will be wonderful, but I recognize that it may not be. I am already living celibate, so I will simply continue on. It's sad but part of the Fall.
32:30 YES!!! Unrepentant adultery leads to everlasting torment in hell. Repentance is not just confessing and being sorry, but being sorry enough to stop the sin - thus by exiting the adulterous remarriage.
Yes John 8, Jesus to the adulterous woman, "Go and sin no longer"
Umm Jesus paid for all your sin. You don’t get forgiveness by repentance but by believing the gospel and placing your trust and faith in his blood atonement.
@@davidchupp4460 then why the verse...the one, who endures....to the end shall be saved....Jesus says, if you love me, keep my commandments.....so salvation, by faith, alone is a false teaching...
@@philipbuckley759 look that’s simply untrue. Paul brought imputed righteousness, justification and sanctification by faith in Christ Jesus and his shed blood for our atonement to us, the body of Christ given directly by revelation of Jesus Christ. Trusting in anything else is trusting in yourself versus Jesus and will damn you.
@@philipbuckley759 loving Jesus and keeping his commandments are great things to do. It however is not salvation. Where in that verses does he say do it for eternal life? Reading salvation into non salvation verses is one of THE BIGGEST problems Christians have. Eternal life comes from believing in Jesus and his shed blood for my sins. And that if I do so I have EVERLASTING life. The scripture does not say everlasting is temporary and you lose it if you don’t do certain things. You can’t have everlasting life if it’s NOT everlasting. That’s a contradiction in terms. Scripture doesn’t lie. It’s humans who twist scripture who are liars.
Thank you. My husband and I where separated 2 years. We are happy now because deep down we believed in these truths. Even if it didn't always feel sensible in the moment. I pray you'll keep preaching this. Amen.
Wow. My husband and I have separated because he was previously married. We got married in the evangelical church. Sadly, he’s not on the same page, so he’s filing for divorce instead of walking this path with me. Please pray for him
His ex-wife is still alive?
@@mommabsfarm8009 if the spouse is still alive, then Biblically it would not be possible to marry.....it would be called adultery....
@@mommabsfarm8009 that means that your...marriage, was adultery and he did the correct thing.....admit, and quit, the sin.....of adultery....you are fortunate.....so one needs to pray, but for you..
divorce is never the issue....the options are....reconcile...or remain single....
I really enjoyed this sermon. Thank you for standing on some hard truth. So few want to be honest about this.
Read 1 Corinthians 7:15 let me know what you understand
Hey sister. I really enjoyed it too, and I know that Jesus has gone to prepare a place for us, and will take His holy people to that place soon. 1 Thessalonians 4. Glad that you know it too.
@@josephrobi6806 not being enslaved, or not under bondage is not akin to not being bound....
@@philipbuckley759 The context of chapter 1 Corinthians 7 is about marriage. Single, Christian couples, mix couples and widows. The mix are unsaved living with a Christian look at that one. I think the Lord is teaching about divorce and remarriage for the mix couples. Because why did he separate them all. If the lord was against remarried he would simply put a blanket statement for all of them but he did not. To my understanding he mentioned the mix couples because the situation is different compare to the Christians couples
Grace to you Tatiana
Honestly, you are not interpreting Jesus' teaching on this issue truthfully!!!
For instance, what did Jesus mean when He spoke of "divorce"?
What did Jesus mean when He said "marries another"?
Doesn't your "interpretation" require you to dismiss those events as if they didn't really occur?
Try interpreting Jesus from the biblical precedents to which He refers instead of the false theories interjected into His teaching. Blessings
Mind blowing fact: the ESV Translation
has a notation about Matthew 19:9 that states some manuscripts repeat the same verbiage from Matthew 5:32 in place of the language in Matthew 19:9… Meaning, no “exception clause,” is even in existence! Wow.
Thank you for preaching the truth! 🙏😇
some of my closest friends.....does there come a time when we need to separate, from ones living in the sin, of adultery....
I am blessed by the teaching! Thank you so much. I must study the history of the Church.
if a man marries a divorced woman, with a living spouse, then this is not a covenant marriage, it is adultery which means the man needs to leave this relationship which usually means divorce....and hence not having been in a covenant relationship, he is free to marry someone else....
Yes, if he’s never been married to someone who was also never been married before.
Correct
I am so concerned for America, we are in such a mess.
Imagine Canada
@@wellsuz2 imagine the world....
1 Corinthians 7:15 if the unbeliever leave she could get remarried. Apostle Paul seems different from that video
@@josephrobi6806 What you state and what the verse states are not the same. That is very frequently the problem in these discussions. The permission is to let the unbeliever go--that the believer is not bound to them. It says nothing of remarriage. "Bound" is not even the same word as is used in the Greek in verse 39 about the marriage vow.
@@ReflectedMiles Thanks for the text. Can you look at my video about 1 Corinthians 7 and come back to me thanks
this all comes down to Proverbs 14.12 “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”
advice....you can not stay in any adulterous relationship.....thank God, that someone actually teaches this...
When Jesus answered about divorce, He was addressing the Pharisees who were wanting to know 'if they could put away for any reason'. They were asking about the Law of Moses divorce law and that, for one, just simply didn't include adultery. It was separate. But it all goes even deeper as marriage is a representation of Christ and the church, not Christ and the world.
Expound
@@randyclark222 the divorce and remarriage for adultery doctrine is based solely on the supposed guilt of the wife in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. However, the wife, in the above scriptures, is clearly not guilty of fornication because the Jews (that Jesus was speaking to) were still living under the law, and if fornication was discovered, there was a moral obligation to report the offender according to Deuteronomy 22:13-24. The wife, who would have been found guilty of fornication, was subsequently stoned to death, according to the law, which had still governed the Jews up until Christ's death on the cross. The same for a woman caught in adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10. How could a wife, guilty of fornication, or adultery, under the law of Moses, be given a writing of divorcement and be caused to commit adultery with whosoever marries her, that is divorced? Jesus is clear, in these examples, that the wife is not guilty of fornication, but is still caused to commit adultery if she marries another man now that she is divorced. This is the only way that Matthew 5:31-32, and Matthew 19:9 keep harmony with Romans 7:2-3, and 1 Corinthians 7:39.
Unlike the synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, which were written to evangelize the Gentiles, Matthew was written to the Jews, and has of 24 characteristics that identify it as intended for the house of Israel.
The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7.
Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death.
The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. Christ's death on the cross caused the Jews to become dead to the law of Moses, so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the ordinances of law of Moses as justification, over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the ordinances of the law is no longer possible, for Israel, and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15.
Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife.
Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned, by an unbelieving spouse, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way some translations word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not enslaved" which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, which is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 shows the Apostle Paul giving those who are abandoned permission to remarry, do not understand the command that Christ gives is to an abandoned husband, in 1 Corinthians 7:11, and that he "must not divorce" his wife, and his wife is commanded to "remain unmarried or else be reconciled" to her husband. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh, due to one's unbelief, puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, and himself, by implying that Paul has issued an opposing command to verses 10-14 in verse 15.
Some also teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16.
The Jewish couples in ancient Israel, who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death, either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with verses 25-26 speaking exclusively to men that have never married. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly in regard to virgin women who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is speaking of a virgin who has become of age to bear children when it says, "let them marry." This is a clear command, to a single man, who has taken a virgin to be his wife. Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring again to the single man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged), under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which again means single men, in the congregation, who have betrothed a wife, do well if they marry, and those who choose not to marry their virgin brides do better, under the current climate. For more proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unscriptural unions.
The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24.
Mark 10:1-12 and Matthew 19:1-12 both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans, and likewise Luke to evangelize the Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching. Please use wisdom when living in any situation against what the scriptures command.
A few questions: 1 Cor 7:15 Is not the Christian unbound (not held to the laws) from the marriage? 2-If divorce and remarriage occur, wouldn't getting another divorce also be a sin?
Thank you so much for this very detailed and in-depth teaching on divorce and remarriage. However, I am very confused about the exception clause where you gave three different views in church history. The book of Matthew was written to the Jews and in the Jewish culture, fornication is referring to their betrothal period which you did mention. Jesus did not give any exception because marriage is until death. Before the wedding during the betrothal was the only time you were allowed to give a certificate of divorce due to fornication. After the wedding, there no longer was an exception. If a woman was found to have committed adultery or any sexual immorality after the wedding she would’ve been stoned to death. And it was called a decree of divorce during the betrothal time because it was considered a marriage even though the wedding had not yet occurred. So while this teaching overall is very detailed it falls apart in a very crucial way with regard to the fact that Jesus said marriage is permanent, until death.
so the final word is.....another false teaching....
So the final word is...... God's words are final. What god has joined together let not man put asunder. Until death do ye part. Ask God for a deeper understanding of His word. God bless 🙏
@@franciscabalbosa4819 amen....
Marriage that is sealed, is until death.
Thank you for your testimony! Well done!
Apostle Paul said: 1 Corinthians 7:15 if the unbeliever leave her she can get remarried.” Contrary to this video. What do you think?
@@josephrobi6806 not under bondage is not the same as not being bound.....ergo a miss interpretation, of the text...
I truly respect and appreciate Finny's message. I absolutely agree that the marriage covenant is the most sacred one you can make and should never be broken. I also agree that context in any Biblical study matters immensely which is where I would like to offer my observation by starting with a couple of questions.
1. Who was Jesus speaking to when He first made the decree about divorce?
2. What was the context of his response?
3. What is the purpose of the law?
Who? The Pharisees and those He was teaching. Context? I personally think it was explained pretty well in this video, however if you have any thoughts to add please expound upon this teaching. Purpose of the law? To point to Christ and God's plan of the ages. What Christ (as well as John and Paul) taught were principles present in the law but were not adhered to. I happen to think people were well aware of these principles but were using written law as an excuse to sin and gain forgiveness without any change of heart. The law was a concession but only in order to point to something greater, that is Christ in you, the hope of glory. The Jews were given over to their hardened ways. The church today has repeated many of the same mistakes but in different ways. She has also been given over to her adulterous ways. The only way to arrive at truth nowadays, in the midst of many winded, cherry-picked doctrines, is to have the Spirit lead you in all things, including your understanding of Scripture. The problem is that many have received the wrong spirit, the spirit of Babylon, thinking this devil disguised as an angel of light is the Spirit of God.
For by the law is the knowledge of sin. It’s your tutor to bring you to Christ.
The Zaccheus argument is weak because he chose to restore what he took out of his own conviction. He wasn’t commanded to repay. Before I was saved I stole clothes from a small business in a mall, years later I was saved. Should I go back and find that store and repay them??
yes you absolutely should.
@@fotwboston 😂 nonsense. That was years ago I don’t even remember the store. I’m forgiven and so I move on and walk in the newness of life. You’re argument is nonsensical
@@Chris.A.H God calls us to repent. Restitution is a part of repentance. The fact that you mentioned this unresolved sin is an indicator that it is still open and un dealt with. The scriptures are clear- when we sin we need to make right what we can. This is repentance. If you can't then you can't, but if you can you should. This is always the case with biblical repentance.
@@fotwboston give me scripture where it says when you repent you have to go back and make it right. You said scripture is clear, so where is it in the Bible? Repent means to turn from sin. So me stealing those clothes before I was saved, means not to go back and steal clothes again. I repented and so I turn from that sin. Making restitution is you adding to the scriptures. Jesus said repent and believe the gospel. He didn’t say repent, go make it right and then believe the gospel. You are adding to the scriptures.
@@Chris.A.H Luke 10: 8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.
Finny, at 33:30 you're saying some of your closest friends are living in remarriage, one minute later you're saying scripture is crystal clear about not communing with someone who is sexually immoral or an adulterer, how does that work?
compromise....
He could have meant not communing in the sense of not eating or taking communion with them. I have some friends from the past who I talk to every now and then but I don’t eat with them and I certainly don’t take communion with them. I’ve read that the early church would not allow communion to the sexual immoral and would bar them from fellowship within the church.
I have a few questions that don’t make sense to me from this teaching:
1) I am curious why Matthew 19 is not referenced or addressed at all. Which is the primary passage of “exception” for anything regarding remarriage. Jesus here specifically mentions what looks like a exception to “marry another” due to fornication/adultery. Do you have another video on this?
2) Adultery always would lead to death of the adulterous spouse in Hebrew/Jewish culture since it is a capital crime, thus, always freeing the victim to be free to remarry. Why would that no longer be so?
Thanks for a response,
Andrew
Grace to you brothers and sisters in Christ
I (like most Christians today) got so caught up in "grounds for divorce" that I missed the simplicity of Jesus' response to the Pharisees question in Matthew 19:3. My thinking (like so many others) was that in some way the divorce must be illegitimate in order for adultery to ensue. This is a common presumption among Pastors and part of their argument for explaining why adultery occurs. So the general way of approaching this issue is to separate the reasons you can divorce from the reasons you can't.
Following the presupposition that Jesus' response was addressing "grounds for divorce" many Pastors (and their adherents) think of divorce as ineffective if those grounds are not meet. This is why they postulate the phrase "still married in God's sight" which (for them) psychologically cancels the divorce if there wasn't grounds for it. When Christians believe that divorced individuals are "still married in God's sight", they then question the legitimacy of remarriage. As a matter of fact there is a view that has a whole scale position against remarriage at all. They actually believe Jesus prohibited remarriage. They even vilify remarriage by stating that "remarriage is adultery". A common but false misnomer!!
Consequently those who understand divorce in God's Word as ending a marriage is tasked with the impossibility of convincing them that those remarried after divorce are actually married to their present spouse and NOT their former. Does this dilemma sound familiar to you in the back and forth debate among believers?
So, would the confusion on this issue be eliminated if Jesus' conclusion about the ensuing adultery was about lawful divorce and remarriage?
In other words, what if the ensuing adultery comes about because the first marriage truly ends when divorced?
What if that is the VERY point Jesus is making, that the divorce concession given to Israel carried the consequence of causing them to inadvertently commit adultery when remarried.
Would Christians then realize that the line of reasoning about 'grounds" and "divorce being ineffective" is errant?
My perspective on Jesus' teaching changed when I realized He had actually circumvented the Pharisees question and instead choose to reveal that when divorce was conceded, an inadvertent transgression ensued. In Jesus' response the adultery is real, the divorce is a real divorce and the next marriage is an actual marriage. Jesus is making an observation based in biblical history where remarriage was allowed under the law after divorce was conceded (as the law of Deut. 24 verse 2 reveals). He is drawing His conclusion about the ensuing adultery from those facts. There's a simple reason why this way of committing adultery ensued and if you actually understand why, you'll also understand why it was not punished.
In verse 8 Jesus is contrasting divorce conceded over against marriage created for life. He wanted His covenant people to realize that there is a consequence to ending a marriage, even for the party that didn't do the divorcing. Something significate in God's creative design for marriage is forfeited in the process of divorce and remarriage. Jesus was simply making the observation that if you do not sustain a marriage then God's creative design for marriage cannot be maintained, particularly when remarried.
The one flesh with only one person for life principle (mentioned in verses 4-6) is inadvertently violated. It's really that simple!! Blessings
Please, do you have a video on believers marrying unbelievers ?
divorce, and remarriage.....is difficult because it hits so close, to home....
Appreciate your teaching but at the 43 minute mark when you speak about people that are in second marriages should not stay married, what if there is a child or children that they have had together that is so sad.
Grace to you
In Jesus' teaching on this issue He was merely revealing to Israel that the divorce concession given to them (Matthew 19:8) carried the consequence of causing them to transgress the one-flesh with one person for life principle of verses 4-6 when remarried. Thus the inadvertent adultery that ensued from violating an obligation intrinsic to marriage. It was NOT a transgression of the law, it was a transgression based in God's design for marriage (8b). Two different ways of committing adultery!!!!!!!!!!
The "one-flesh with one person for life" obligation could not be sustained from divorce conceded unless God acted to prohibit remarriage, which He did NOT. The law of Deuteronomy 24 which represented God's Will reveal's marriage was graciously allowed.
Outside of admonishing them to stop separating the one-flesh union in verse 6 (to remedy the inadvertent adultery), Jesus instructed NOTHING else. That is a "before the facts" solution. Only Moses gave "after the fact" instruction to divorce and remarriage. There is NO leaving one's current marriage in God's Word for this way of committing adultery. That's because it was unintentional, given the facts that remarriage was graciously allowed after divorce was conceded (Deuteronomy 24:2). Blessings
I’m living in this sin currently. I dont know what to do. I am in a second marriage and I have 2 small children with my current husband. My first husband was very wicked and we had no children. I have no skills, money or place to go if we lived apart.
Christ told the rich guy to sell everything he had and to follow him. What is Christ telling you?
Just curious. I spent much of my life as a criminal and have no way to pay back these ppl. The thief on the cross could do it either.
I think u think we can earn God's favour.
You can't pay back always but you can certainly stop sleeping with another person's spouse.
What about 1 Corinthians 7:15 ?
Could you organize this playlist in chronological order? Seems they are out of place
May I ask a question. If a man and woman divorce because the wife committed adultry, and then they want to recincile....Is that permissable since the couple does not live in the land of Israel?
Very good n clear teaching!!! Thank u brother.
Excellent talk! Please would you do one on the other exception clause verse Matt 19 v 9?
Also, 2 questions..If a couple wishes to repent of an adulterous remarriage is it O.k to still live together still but in celibacy? Is it just the physical intimacy that is the adulterous aspect?
Read 1 Corinthians 7:15 if an unbeliever leave her she can get remarried.” Apostle Paul seems contrary to this video
@@josephrobi6806 That isn't what it says in verse 15. It says she is no longer bound in servitude, but she is still BOUND until death in verse 39. NO remarriage is allowed and is ongoing adultery.
Jacqueline, the Bible says that there isn't supposed to be even an appearance of adultery, so you would want to obey the will of the Father- Matthew 7:21-23. Some people that I have talked to have tried to stay living as a brother and sister in the Lord with no hugging, touching, kissing etc., but it rarely works since there is the temptation to sin.
Would God split up a happy family? www.loudvoice.org/a/sermon/would-god-split-up-a-family
Walking by the Spirit Always The verse 39 is for two believers look at the context. Verse 15 is one believer
Now I understand why yeshua said......ohhhhh wicked and adulterous generation
Great teaching on MDR! America is suffering with a serious sin problem. The hypocritical church points it's finger at the world's sin, but fails to recognize sin within its own walls. Judgement begins at the house of God!
good point....
Not even just America Scott the whole world it is terrible....
I heard that adultery in the bible meant when a woman was bethrothed, engagement period, and found to not be a virgin or had sex with someone. THis was Jewish culture.
Very sound biblical teaching. Thank you!
I’m not sure on that. 1 Corinthians 7 teaches us that remarried is possible. “Unbeliever leaving her.”
@@josephrobi6806 how many times does one have to address.....it is bondage, not bound....another term.......which had just been used.....do you think the writer forgot that....
@@josephrobi6806 over and over......not under bondage is not akin to not bound...
@@josephrobi6806 NO
I am interested in people who follow the idea that they have to divorce if they are in a remarriage with a divorced person and think that they have to get out of the relationship and have children and a happy home. I spent 18 years with a guy who cheated on me and used me. I was blessed not to have children with him since he was also bipolar. I am now in a loving marriage and have a child and stepchild and growing stronger in my faith. So to do the “right” thing, I am supposed to break up my family and struggle to raise my child and loose my stepson as well? I have a hard time believing that this is God’s idea for a loving family. My children are still living at home and my stepson has already gone through two divorces with his mom. Sure it is hard dealing with an ex and divorce, but any relationship can be difficult at times. Where’s the two wrongs make a right here. To me this seems somewhat like an excuse to get out of a relationship. I kept hoping that the speaker would address this type of situation. I made a mistake the first time around and still tried to do the whole life thing. I feel that now I got it right and God brought me and my husband for a reason and we wish that we could have been each other’s first, but are each other’s lasts. Thoughts?
Grace to you Debbie
Jesus' teaching on this issue is much more simple then the interpretation of someone else's interpretation given by Finny in this message. Jesus is literally referring to the termination of one marriage (when He speaks of divorce) and literally the constitution of a second marriage (when He says "marries another").
EVERYTHING He concludes He is drawing from the writings of Moses. The law of Deuteronomy 24 reveals that divorce ended one marriage and the second marriage was a marriage that one was then bound. As you can tell from that text the former husband who repudiated his wife was NOT allowed to remarry her IF in the intervening time she had remarried.
In Jesus' teaching on this issue He is merely revealing to Israel that the divorce concession given to them (Matthew 19:8) carried the consequence of causing them to transgress the one-flesh with one person for life principle of verses 4-6 when remarried. Thus the inadvertent adultery that ensued from violating an obligation intrinsic to marriage. It was NOT a transgression of the law, it was a transgression based in God's design for marriage (8b). Two different ways of committing adultery!!!!!!!!!!
The "one-flesh with one person for life" obligation could not be sustained from divorce conceded unless God acted to prohibit remarriage, which He did NOT. The law of Deuteronomy 24 which represented God's Will reveal's marriage was graciously allowed.
Outside of admonishing them to stop separating the one-flesh union in verse 6 (to remedy the inadvertent adultery), Jesus instructed NOTHING else. That is a "before the facts" solution. Only Moses gave "after the fact" instruction to divorce and remarriage. There is NO leaving one's current marriage in God's Word for this way of committing adultery. That's because it was unintentional, given the facts that remarriage was graciously allowed after divorce was conceded (Deuteronomy 24:2). Blessings
@@nealdoster8556 thank you for your response. I didn’t think or feel that breaking up a second marriage such as mine was right, but I like to see evidence from the Word for that feeling and line of thought. I believe that God shows us in His own time what is truth and we shouldn’t lean on our own understanding. I do remember the verse from Deuteronomy, and know someone who actually was disfellowshipped for returning to a first husband after marrying two others. Just needed the reminder of that text.
The Word is full of gems that can’t all be collected with one reading and to think that we know them all is foolishness. May we keep sharing those that we find with others. God bless you as well.
@@debbiekaebirge-coitan1372 Please hear me out & dont be deceived. If you read Luke 16:18 it is pretty straightforward on this, as it states "Everyone who divorces his wife & marries another commits adultery, & he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery", ESV version. It still translates the same in the KJV & NLT. If you & your partner were both married before & your ex spouses are still alive, you are unfortunately in adultery & would have to leave one another in order to repent. Also read Roman's 7:2-3 pertaining to a woman remaining single or reconciling with her FIRST husband. May God bless you in this truth
Thank you for tackling such a difficult subject. Is it permissible for a Christian brother who has been divorced by his wayward (unbelieving?) wife to marry a woman whose husband has died?
how about Joseph and Mary.......
Wow!!! Faithful teaching!!!
Can you read 1 Corinthians 7:15 the unbelieving man leaving her look like she can get remarried
@@josephrobi6806 I came to the same conclusion about 1 month ago.
William Brewer And what is that conclusion? Are you agreeing with me
@@josephrobi6806 yes.
Joseph Robi Having been in this situation myself, I research very much into that passage. What I discovered is the type of freedom they are referring to is freedom from my responsibilities of serving my husband, doulas. It is not referring to freedom to go and marry whomever I wish, as long as my first valid covenant marriage partner is still alive. My vow to God was, as long as we both shall live. Neither Jesus nor the New Testament, Neither apostles nor their disciples in the early church interpreted as the freedom to go and marry again, while your first Marriage partner is still alive. May we be we faithful and live holy lives!
Can a woman divorce her husband if he is physically abusing her? Or she should stay married with the abusive husband
God bless this beloved brother.
Being married to a divorcee (my wife), this is a very very hard teaching. In order for me to enter into the Kingdom of God, I will have to divorce my wife. Which will in turn leave our 3 kids bouncing back and forth between two households. She (my wife) will probably re-marry again, meaning there will be another male figure around my children (at least half the time), god knows who. Are you sure this would be the right thing to do in my situation?
Please be bold enough to give answer?
God doesn’t see you marriage to her as a marriage, God sees it as sin. To divorce your wife would be repentance from sin. Here is a link to help answer some questions you may have.....
cadz.net/
The Word of God is clear that all the passages were answering in context of the law. That is why Jesus leaves off men divorced by their wives and also woman married to divorced men.
It’s why Paul’s example in Romans 7 says to those that know the law and then goes on to talk of women being bound.
It’s why it is said that men who are deacons are to be the husband of one wife (bc some believers were not) .
It’s why in I Corinthians 7 Paul says a woman should remain unmarried or reconcile if she departs but he tells the husband just not to divorce her. He repeats this again right after the first mention! In I Corinthians 7:39 he also says again that a woman is bound.
Why on earth would anyone want to dismiss all of these facts? You can’t dump the pronouns. Do you make the Bible gender neutral? These things were said in direct contrast to each other. It matters! And it’s why some people are falling into this false marriage doctrine.
Amaranth : Its amusing to me how people try and justify sin of adultery, and to see them explain away and try and do so theological gymnastics around what the Bible clearly teaches about the permanency of marriage for LIFE, UNTILL DEATH!
As Jesus would say, “Have you not read?????” (One flesh, what God has joined together man cannot unjoin)
Mathew 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.
Mark 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.👈🏽
Luke 16
15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: 👉🏼and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.👈🏽
In the beginning they were also virgins! THAT is the true way that God intends this NOT your partial version! Sin entered the world and now both may not come to be exactly as planned!
So do you believe in a gender neutral Bible? Because you are choosing to disregard the pronouns! They matter! The context was the law and it shows
if one is divorced, and remarried...should we even associate, with them......
I absolutely did not understand his breakdown of the the "exception clause". But i do agree that, bottom line, there's no remarriage.
Wonderfully clear teaching, thank you
1 Corinthians 7:15 if the unbeliever leave her she can get remarried.” What do you think? Paul said contrary to this video
He was incredibly clear, and especially at the very end his emphatic answer that if in a remarriage it must be repented of and ended, was the absolute truth.
Walking by the Spirit Always He believe working salvation. Work plus the cross. About the remarriage see 1 cor. 7:15 and 27-28 mix marriage totally different than 1cor 7:10 and verse 39 who are Christians couple who cannot remarried
@@josephrobi6806 Works AFTER being born again DO matter- Dear friends, you always followed my instructions when I was with you. And now that I am away, it is even more important. WORK HARD to show the results of your salvation, obeying God with deep reverence and fear. For God is working in you, giving you the desire and the power to do what pleases him. Do everything without complaining and arguing, so that no one can criticize you. Live clean, innocent lives as children of God, shining like bright lights in a world full of crooked and perverse people. Hold firmly to the word of life; then, on the day of Christ’s return, I will be proud that I did not run the race in vain and that my work was not useless. But I will rejoice even if I lose my life, pouring it out like a liquid offering to God, just like your faithful service is an offering to God. And I want all of you to share that joy. Yes, you should rejoice, and I will share your joy.
Philippians 2:12-18
Walking by the Spirit Always work is useless if you are not saved first
So I should divorce my amazing, loving, godly husband, and go remarry a man who was physically mentally and spiritually abusive, who would punish me if i went to church, who told me how he was going to kill both of us, who would choke me until I was about to pass out? I thought it was God who orchestrated an incredible sequence of events to get me out of there and put my God- loving parents there to support me in escaping his hell.... really.
You don’t need to be reconciled to your first husband, but The scriptures are clear that you would be in adultery. And your current husband as well because he’s married to a divorced woman whose first husband is still living. Hard pills to swallow. But if you remain in it then you and your godly husband perish.
I think it is worth noting that the Shepherd of Hermas was one of the most highly respected works among the earliest Christians, a work of allegory, and part of its insight is that divorce does have a last-resort use, and that it is the same for both men and women. It is to be used as family discipline when all else fails, when a spouse is in unrepentant adultery, just as excommunication is used by the Church--and for the same purpose. Not acting when one knows of the sin and there is a refusal to repent, Hermas's heavenly character explains, means being a sharer in the sin. This isn't a novel concept. The Bible describes God as divorcing Israel, for exactly the same cause and with exactly the same purpose--for repentance and restoration--despite having declared that He hates divorce. He never goes and marries another nation instead. Remarriage is never an option or consideration. While Jesus' example is of a man putting away his wife, the example in 1 Cor. 7 is of a wife feeling compelled to leave her husband, either remaining unmarried or being reconciled.
Wow this is good
I know someone putting their eternal destiny, in the teaching, of John Piper....that says, if you are already remarried, albeit against the teaching of Scripture.....repent....and remain, in that relationship.....
Horrendous advice that leads people to Hell. 🥺
if this πορνεία were of a Joseph and Mary situation, it would not be such of an issue.....meaning that once the covenant has been established, this would no longer be an issue, and no contradiction between this and the other texts, on this topic...
Can a woman marry a divorced man. If his first wife committed adultery ( and so did he which is what lead the 1st wife to cheat) and the woman he wants as his second wife has never been married and has no children.
No
John Piper, John MacArthur, and Voddie Baucham are the high-profile preachers he's talking about that I know of
@Carl Edwards he said protestant.
Neither of those guys are
John Piper has a strong teaching, but then retracts by saying if you are already divorced and remarried, stay in that relationship......he folded, at the end......
If so all three men are great bible expositors. All of them realize that the bible doesn't teach for those remarried to divorce their present spouse. Transgressing the current marriage does not resolve this issue.
@@nealdoster8556 the so called marriage is not a marriage, but adultery, there in lies the dilemma......
@@philipbuckley759 So you say but Jesus said "marries another" which obviously refers to being married to another!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jesus was Not speaking in pretense Philip and you do not interpret Christ from the history to which He refers.
if someone is divorced and remarried, with no Biblical backing, that relationship is not a marriage, but adultery.....and not only would it be permissible, but necessary to leave, because it is adultery....and that is usually done, via a divorce...
this is not, an exception, this is quitting a sin....the divorce from what the Bible calls an adulterous relationship...
if one marrys a divorced woman, and as such the relationship, is adultery, then it is not a real marriage....and yes, not only would one be able to leave this, they would be required to....to effect a repentance.....
The woman at the well was married many times and Jesus said she had many husbands.
@@sarahs7253 how many times does one have to say...appeal, to ignorance.....as no information is given as to why she had that number, of husbands....
What about divorced and then years after divorce,one person dies? Can the other then marry again?
Grace to you Stephanie
Your question starts from the presupposition that remarriage wasn't allowed after divorce. Start instead with the biblical fact that remarriage was allowed as the law of Deuteronomy 24 verse 2 reveals. Jesus' teaching on this issue should be interpreted congruous with that truth. Not as if Jesus disagreed with Moses or the law or that He prohibiting remarriage Himself. Follow the biblical facts on this issue chronological, not by teaching that randomly selects scriptures to build an errant view. Blessings
Elizabeth J Drake was it a first marriage or widowed for you both? If so, I am so sorry! But if you, like my fake “ex”, actually had a first covenant spouse already (or your partner did) than the marriage you speak of was a fake even if your first spouse left you and you had no kids together.
I know because my fake ex goes around to churches speaking of her “stand” for my return to her and our uncovenant 5 kids together. These churches are the kind that believe marriages are only covenant if between believers or between a believer and an unsaved spouse that has stayed with them. So you can see how I try to carefully give my sympathy. As I said I will be in tears if your marriage is covenant.😞 but I rejoice that it ended if it was not.
So... What if you have whored before any marriage agreement has been settled with a woman but never been married?
Anders Erichsen ,
Well, that fornication would be sin, but there is no marriage covenant seen by God. Sex alone does not make a marriage. If there is no living previous spouse, that person would be free to marry. Though they should repent of, and ask God to forgive them for that past fornication.
REPENT DUMMY AND MARRY ONLY IN THE LORD
So what about the second spouse? If you leave them are they free to re marry? This is sort of confusing.
Doris Mahoney : a link to help answer some questions you may have.....
cadz.net/
your explanation of the exception clause is confusing, to be polite....
Tragically the world has got into the Church! It is mainly not being taught because it is an emotive subject and so many in this situation - even many Pastors being M, D & R! Just after I first got saved I really sense the Holy It's not about our happiness but walking in holiness! We have to interpret the unclear verses in the Bible in the light of the clear ones and so many take the Matthew 19v9 exception clause as the excuse for divorce and remarriage. Christians are to follow Jesus - love your neighbour/spouse. If we do not forgive others He will not forgive us. Where is the 'for better or worse etc' vows made before God! I read that statistically there are more divorces and remarriage within the church than amongst the unsaved! We need strong marriages and teaching on it in the church to be a strong witness for this lost world. John Baptist lost his head for telling Herod it was not 'lawful' to have Herodias. IF it was a case of just repenting Herod could just say sorry and carry on but the Greek is present continuous (I read). Repentance is turning away from the adulterous relationship not to continue living in it. IF a homosexual gets saved, they do not just repent and stay in that relationship as it's sinful, just as is adultery
If a couple never marries civilly or religiously, are they safe, or is that even worse? If a man marries a woman who has had a child out of wedlock, and then marries someone else how is that looked upon? If a man fathers child/children out of wedlock and then marries someone else, how is that looked upon?
this is an interestion question.....as the person has no covenant relationship....so it would seem possible to marry....
This is why virginity is actually the seal of marriage and marrying and claiming to be a virgin (since only virgin wives were taken back then to mother the true heirs)... not a virgin was a sin unto death back then and also why taking a girls virginity compelled the man caught to marry the girl unless the father said no.
But I know we need to live by the SPIRIT and not the letter
So I am just saying this as something we need to consider and pray about
The blood shed actually represents the blood of Jesus
“We enter into the holiest of holies by the blood of Jesus”
Study it out...
Heaven views virginity HIGH importance
It’s not religious
It’s all about Jesus 😭and our covenant with HIM
It’s worship
But, we are to be led BY THE HOLY SPIRIT OF TRUTH not the letter
Jesus said “what therefore GOD hath joined together”
What is viewed as fornication by GOD THE FATHER that the world and even the two making the vows in immaturity or foolishness or ignorance about the other... that all others view as marriage?
What does GOD THE FATHER uphold? Where does HE have mercy?
But also there is Gal 3:15
HE wants us to walk in integrity
Rambling...
We need to dicern this
Help me Jesus please help us all
John 17
So, if a single man married a divorced woman, then she committed adultery(cheated on her current spouse) and they got divorced, Is it still sin for that man to get remarried?
if one marries a divorced woman, that relationship is adultery, and not a covenant relationship so, by definition, the man would be free to marry....
Would Jesus "obliterate the concessions" without capacitating his listeners?
could you please repeat this answer, into English...
@@philipbuckley759 The concessions Finney is talking about were given because of hardness of heart. The concessions wouldn't be taken away without a change of heart that would make adherence to the command possible.
@@jamesburns8285 interesting, thanx...
So what about abuse? There are countries where women are forced to marry men that are twice their age and are extremely abusive both mentally and physically... if that woman gets the privilege of obtaining a divorce should she not remarry if she finds someone who truly loves her?
No. Read about Jacob's daughter, Dinah, in Genesis. She was raped by the prince of the land. Jacob insisted the prince marry Dinah as was his just duty because she could now marry no other. The womb is sacred and once penetrated is in union through a blood covenant with the one who penetrated it. This covenant is reflective of the union of Christ and His bride. In all reality the union of man and woman is a parable of this. Christ Himself, as well as Paul, encouraged us to not marry, I believe, because the purity of the union has been so corrupted that it is a serious danger for us to enter into such a challenging covenant without falling into adultery. Our covenant is first and foremost with Him. Our Savior came through a virgin just as His church must be born through the same purity by the Spirit. In fact, we are warned not to make any covenants, not because making such a covenant is a sin but because the risk of falling into sin is great. that is why I will not enter into any contractual agreement, especially one where man forces his own law on it outside the law of God. God has given this world over to its own rebellious ways and we must not confuse our morality with His. His ways are greater than our ways. What was once a blessing and gift to mankind we have twisted into a horrible, prodigal beast. So now we who are in this world, but are not of this world, must stand strong in our covenant with our God. While we are here we will be refined as silver is purified, tried as gold is tried, and threshed and sifted as wheat in the harvest of souls.
NO FORCED MARRIAGE IS VALID BEFORE GOD OR PEOPLE WHO MARRY IN SATANIC RITUALS YES THESE WOMEN HAVE A RIGHT TO REMARRY VOLUNTARILY BUT BY THEIR OWN SOBER VOLITION ONLY IN THE LORD DRUNKEN LAS VEGAS MARRIAGES ARE NOT VALID MARRIAGES BEFORE GOD GODLY MARRIAGES AND LEGAL MARRIAGES CONFLICT ONLY GOD CAN MAKE TWO ONE FLASH AND ONLY GOD CAN SEPARATE THEM
SORRY I MEANT FLESH
@@ronduckett8706 swears to there own hurt, and changes not. God is holy and good word is settled forever in the heavens. Quite out of reach of man's wisdom and ways. Blessed are those who take refuge in him.
@@ronduckett8706 and you are yelling, for what reason....
Thanks for this clear and noncompromising teaching, I wholeheartedly agree. I have just one question that becomes pretty important in this matter. When do man and woman become one flesh? How do I know if someone was already married? What God has joined together let no man separate, but when does God do the joining?
after the vows have been made they are pronounced, to be, husband and wife....
@@philipbuckley759 yeah but none of this is rooted in scripture or is it?
They become one flesh when it is consummated. Issac and Rebekah. But we still have to follow the Law of the land and be legally married first.
God does the joining when we wholeheartedly seek HIS choice for us, not a spouse of our own choosing.
@@kateleurs5012 arranged by the parents? And or mistakes made in our youth? Either way and from what Father has done in my life, the foundational scripture is "what God ordains let no man break asunder". He can correct mistakes as we seek Him and truth, fully surrendered to Him but we must follow His leading and not take action based on our own understanding.
@@kateleurs5012 lol! We all make mistakes. But our.God is sooo amazing He can make our wrongs right!
For those who want to use Duet 24 (Moses Law) for divorce and forbidding remarriage to first spouse. Jesus House vs Moses House: Wherefore holy brethren partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, CHRIST JESUS (2) Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also MOSES was faithful in all his house. (3) For this man was counted worthy of more glory than MOSES inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.(4) For every house is builded by some man but he that built ALL things is GOD. (5) And Moses verily was faithful in ALL his house as a servant for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; (6) BUT CHRIST AS A SON OVER HIS OWN HOUSE; WHOSE HOUSE ARE WE, IF WE HOLD FAST WITH CONFIDENCE AND THE REJOICING OF THE HOPE FIRM UNTO THE END.
Christ says do not think I come to destroy the laws or the prophets right? Deuteronomy 24"1-4, it specifically says the first husband divorced her for some indecency, then she may go and become another man's wife. His command is she must not go back to the first, and the first husband must not take her back after that she has been defiled right? You didn't even say anything about Moses command. And today hearts are still hard. Jesus express in Mathew 5:32 the ideal for marriage, he was expressing the ideal not overruling Moses. That's why he gives the exception for divorce and remarry which is the same thing Moses did. In Mark and Luke is basically saying the general idea of marriage. 1 Corinthians 7:27,28, Paul is saying the same thing art thou bound to a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife, but if thou marry, thou has not sinned. This sentence is specifically says if you divorced and remarry you have not sinned. All on the same accord Amen brother!!!
Since you are quoting Paul in Corinthians, don't overlook what he says ,once a person has divorced, remain SINGLE, if you want to remarry, remarry your first spouse. This is a commandment.. in other scripture it says you cannot go back to your first spouse if they went and married, divorced someone else, then they cannot remarry them because they are greatly polluted. When Paul says ,if they do get married they are not sinning. He is speaking of virgins marrying. Paul wouldn't contradict himself in the same sentence.
1 Corinthians 7:27,28 is not about virgins. Cause he didn't say it's for virgins. He's saying the same thing Moses said and what Jesus said. You just don't want to believe that Jesus did give an exception for divorce and remarry. Anyway this book was written by men and not by Jesus or his apostles. This book was written two hundred years after the death of Joshua and the apostles. The apostles were illiterate couldn't read or write. So they didn't write anything in the Bible. And also the ancient tablets scripts tells a different story than what the Roman's wrote in the Bible. Know your history people...❤
the term is fornication....as sex, out of the marriage bond, has its own term....adultery....which would allow the marriage covenant to be broken....and contradict both Mark, and Luke....
Please read Exodus 22:16. Fornication is when a woman marries a man who didn't take her virginity. Thank you!
John Piper....says this...stay....it is on his utube channel.....
at least this speaker calls the remarried, to repent, to leave that relationship.....
if one is in ....an adulterous marriage, then it is not a marriage, in the sight, of God, therefore it needs to be terminated....and that probably would be achieved, by a divorce...
Is this only for Christians or for any one ?
For everyone
Can you re marry at all ? If so what are the situations that are ok to remarry in.
Only death of the spouse.
Only for death
Sorry , wrong answer. The exception is found in the Book of Mathew and Mathew as you may know was written with a Jewish audience in mind. The Jewish culture of those days practiced a very strict form of courtship, ( Joseph and Mary ) where if during this courtship one of the two would commit adultery, hence fornication, they would need to formally dissolve the relationship similar to divorce. So being that we in our modern western culture don't practice this kind of courtship, the exception clause does not pertain to us in our modern societies.
I dont think women were left out in the streets when they were put away in those times. Most cases they were actually sent back to their parents. Its the father that would have had to give her up for marriage in the first place,so she would be returned to her fathers home.
The key to interpreting Jesus' teaching on divorce is understanding that you SHOULD interpret Him from the biblical precedents to which He refers in a congruous manner, NOT as if Jesus disagreed with the law or Moses. Jesus does NOT actually answer the loaded question the Pharisees asked Him in verse 3 of Matthew 19 about lawful grounds for divorce. The very reason that question was difficult to answer (then and now) was because the law did NOT give grounds for divorce, it merely regulated it. The question was issue to Jesus merely to cause Him to be in conflict with the law itself. It was a trick question, one that Jesus did NOT fall for.
Jesus (knowing the heart and intent of the Pharisees) instead chose to reveal what ending a marriage prematurely (divorce) causes for the next marriage. If you interpret Jesus from the biblical precedents to which He refers, those divorced and remarried do NOT remain one flesh to one spouse for life. They become one flesh with their present spouse which violates (in principle) God's creative design in the origin. That's the catch 22 that allows one to understand the simplicity of Jesus' teaching on this matter. The key to understanding Jesus is in verse 8 where He contrast divorce conceded over against marriage created for life. To understand the main point Jesus is making is to accept the fact that when one marriage ends (before death), fidelity for life cannot be sustained when remarried.
The paradox is real and can be understood if you accept the fact that remarriage was graciously allowed following divorce, but being one flesh with one person for life is inadvertently transgressed circumstantially. Speaking to and about the divorce concession, Jesus is directly revealing what transpires by one marriage being supplanted by another. Conversely He did not teach that the first marriage "survived" or the one flesh union wasn't separated, or the original "covenant" was still binding for those remarried. You CANNOT divest "divorce" and "marries another" (spoken by Jesus) of meaning without INVERTING and exaggerating His teaching. Blessing
But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?"
NONSENSE!!! If an unsaved person gets remarried and then comes to Christ afterwards. His sin is forgiven and he does not have to dissolve his marriage and become single in order to show true repentance. That is complete nonsense.
read Matthew 5......if one divorces a spouse, without Biblicals grounds, it makes him to be responsible for his wifes adultery.....hmmm...no provision, here for that innocent party..
Amen!!! Need this!!!
Many believe that sex makes you one flesh. God makes you one flesh, not sex. Think about Adam and Eve. God took Adam's rib and made Eve. So they were of the same (one) flesh. Later Adam "knew" (sex) his wife and she conceived.
why use another term, for adultery......this does not make sense......
The Word of God is clear that all the passages were answering in context of the law. That is why Jesus leaves off men divorced by their wives and also woman married to divorced men.
It’s why Paul’s example in Romans 7 says to those that know the law and then goes on to talk of women being bound.
It’s why it is said that men who are deacons are to be the husband of one wife (bc some believers were not) .
It’s why in I Corinthians 7 Paul says a woman should remain unmarried or reconcile if she departs but he tells the husband just not to divorce her. He repeats this again right after the first mention! In I Corinthians 7:39 he also says again that a woman is bound.
Why on earth would anyone want to dismiss all of these facts? You can’t dump the pronouns. Do you make the Bible gender neutral? These things were said in direct contrast to each other. It matters! And it’s why some people are falling into this false marriage doctrine.
Amaranth are there any women in the Law that put away/divorced their husbands?
Can a person be married to an adulterer?
Women could put away, yes. Or would Jesus had even mentiOned it if it was not possible?
The context is the law. It is even seen when we see that bishops are to be the husband of one wife. That is the qualification
For one in leadership. What of the other men?
Yes for even Jesus mentioned “women who divorce their husband “
The bible says no one should marry a divorced woman. The bible does not state that no one should marry a divorced man. Actually, the man does not need to divorce his wife to remarry - he can marry two or more if he pleases, as long as both women are not divorced and he is not planning to be a leader in church.
The burden is placed on men 1. Not to divorce their wives except for adultery and not to marry divorced women. No where is a man who is already married and marries an unmarried woman called an adulterer. I am a woman, I hate it but that's what the bible states.
whoa.....where do you get the term....sexual immorality....and not fornication.....which is a different take, on this subject...
Philip Buckley the Koine Greek.
@@johnborland7865 no.....Erasmus, changed it, and Luther, the darling child of the so called Reformation, is said to have promoted it...
@@johnborland7865 πορνεία
@@philipbuckley759 so you keep saying yet plenty of modern scholars with more manuscripts than Erasmus could even dream of agree fornication as an illicit unlawful or sinful sex “only before a marriage not after” concept is fundamentally wrong.
@@johnborland7865 sex, out of the marriage bond is...μοιχεία or adultery....
the fastest way, to a false teaching is through the emotions....this is not fair....it is not our call, if the text says so, we need to follow it....
I still miss my first husband .
Divorce is worse than death .
@@patriciarowland8230 Grace to you Patricia
I agree with your sentiments, especially if you been taught that Christians should overlook the fact that God did not require those divorced to remain single for the rest of their life.
If you start with the truth that God under the law allowed remarriage after divorce (Deuteronomy 24:2) you will have the proper basis for understanding Jesus' teaching on the matter. That's because everything Jesus concluded was derived from the writings of Moses. Everything Jesus' concluded was relevant to Israel historically.
So yes Jesus did reveal divorce has a consequence. Jesus did reveal that ending a marriage before death (inadvertently) causes one to commit adultery against their former spouse when remarried (Mark 10:11). But He said that in light of the fact that remarriage was graciously allowed under the law, understand?
Jesus is not speaking in a vacuum, He was directly speaking to Israel's history where divorce was conceded (Matthew 19:8) and remarriage allowed, understand?
Yes divorce has a consequence for both parties but Jesus is careful to explain that the husband who repudiates his wife is culpable for the adultery she is caused to commit, why?
Because under the law he was releasing her with the right of remarriage. If he had not divorced her she would have avoided committing adultery this way. That is why Jesus blames him and not her, understand?
This way of committing adultery was not punished because it was unintentional and one should NEVER make the mistake that it is the same thing as being unfaithful while married (which was punished). Blessings
Remarriage - An Adulterous Lifestyle 💔
Much as divorce is sinful, remarriage following divorce is yet more sinful. It is a step 🚶♀️ further against the moral laws of God. The Scriptures consistently describe remarriage while a person's partner lives as adultery.
Consider the following verses:
"And he saith unto them Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery" (Mark 10:11, 12).
"And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and Whosoever marrieth her who is put away doth commit adultery" (Mathew 19:9).
"Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and Whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery" ( Luke 16:18).
"So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man" (Romans 7:3).
These Scriptures consistently describe remarriage as adultery. The Greek verb tense translated "committeth adultery" shows present continuous action, suggesting not simply an act of adultery, but a practice of adultery. The verse in Romans likewise shows that while a person's partner lives, remarriage is not a valid marriage👎, but an adulterous condition. There is an act of adultery- the sin of sexual union while married to another. There is also the condition of adultery - the sin of a marriage relationship with another while one's true 💑 marriage partner is living.
With such clear Scriptures, why would professing Christians ✝️ 🤔 attempt to justify divorce and remarriage? One lady who herself married a divorced man and later denounced her situation as an adulterous union described her downfall.
REASONING is one of satan's 😈 most effective weapons. How easy 😏 to reason away obedience to the Word of God. The eternal purpose ✨ 💛 of this life is not so much that we should be happy but that we should be holy. Yet there can be no true happiness apart from righteous living...
"I fasted and prayed 🙏 a great deal, seeking God for an answer directly from Himself. But, although I sought a word from Him, no word was given. Nothing. Complete 🔕 silence. Only later did it come home to me that it is vanity seek a rhema (utterance) from God when He has already so clearly spoken in the written Word. Yes, a word may come which contradicts what He has said in the Scriptures; but that word 🤔 comes from the wrong source 😈.
It is impossible to remarry with integrity while one's partner is still living. The treacherous spirit which leads to divorce is the same spirit which leads one to remarry. It is a betrayal 😔. In marriage , 💑 one can give his commitment to his partner, but in remarriage one can give only his treachery and 💔 broken trust.
- Christian Family Living, pgs 173-175, John Coblentz.
@@patriciarowland8230 Grace to you Patricia
Did you notice in the post left by "SetApartOne" that he or she didn't explain those scriptures within CONTEXT, but rather gave an interpretation from fear?
That particular interpretation is what I call "the exaggerated view" because it randomly selects scriptures to build that interpretation with false suppositions added to it. That interpretation doesn't explain Jesus' teaching on this issue from the Biblical history to which He referred. Randomly selecting scriptures can build ANYTHING theoretically, right?
Conversely if you follow the chronological facts you will properly understand this issue. For instance, did you know that when Jesus spoke to this issue He wasn't referring to any New Testament scriptures at all?
None existed at that time and that is why it is important to KNOW the Biblical facts as they happen in Biblical history. EVERYTHING Jesus concluded was derived from the writings of Moses. EVERYTHING He concluded should be understood in harmony with those inspired scriptures. You SHOULD interpreted Jesus and Moses congruous and NOT as if Jesus was opposing the law.
Any Christian who knows God's Word knows God is both Holy and Gracious. Fortunately when divorce was conceded (as Jesus mentions in Matthew 19:8) God acted in GRACE. He didn't prohibit remarriage after divorce (as some falsely believe).
When you say "Divorce is worse than death" you are expressing the sentiment of someone who has been subjected to the teaching represented in the post left by "SetApartOne", right?
That sentiment would have been the exact same way all the Old Testament women would have felt if God had prohibited them from marriage after being repudiated by their husband. Fortunately God responded by allowing them to remarry. You shouldn't interpret Jesus' teaching on this issue "as if" He was opposing the Father or Moses or the law, understand?
Be careful of all the false suppositions interjected into Jesus' teaching because they generate fear instead of objectively understanding Jesus.
If you KNOW the Biblical facts Jesus was referring to then you can determine that all those women were caused to commit adultery (Matthew 5:32) because their husbands (who controlled divorce under that social construct) did NOT love them as they should. When divorcing them the husband was releasing his wife with the right of remarriage. Unfortunately ending a marriage before death causes one to commit adultery against their former spouse when remarried (Mark 10:11). That was Jesus' point. He gave them a reason to stay married but He didn't prohibit marriage, nor contradict the Father, Moses, or the law.
The interpretation of "SetApartOne" wants you to believe Jesus prohibited remarriage (which would contradict Biblical history), but that is FALSE also. There is NO prohibition for remarriage in Jesus' teaching. Look for yourself. You have to interject FALSE suppositions into Jesus' teaching to believe that.
There is NO prohibition for remarriage in Biblical history until we get to Paul's response to the questions submitted to him by the church of Corinth (1 Cor. 7:1). In the different circumstances he addressed he only restricts remarriage when a Christian woman divorces her Christian husband (1 Cor. 7:11). There she is instructed to reconcile or remain unmarried. That is the first and only time remarriage is prohibited after being divorced.
If you just randomly select scriptures to build your view (instead of following Biblical facts chronologically) then you can claim that was a uniform prohibition for all circumstances as "SetApartOne" does. But the TRUTH is that prohibitions is UNIQUE, NOT uniform (as Biblical history reveals).
Be careful that your mind is not plagued with extremes that FALSELY misrepresents both the Father, the Son as well as Paul. It seems to me your present understanding on this issue was formulated by the "exaggerated view". Hope you will come to understand this subject by the Biblical facts instead of the imposition of fear from false suppositions. Blessings
Hello, grace and peace to you.
I am writing because this teaching does not add up.
If you submit that a divorce is a sin but then continue with a line of reasoning that says if you have remarried again you should leave that marriage and repent and divorce again...well, that math doesn't work
One sin (original divorce) + another sin ( which is your council to leave that situation and add another divorce) can not equate to redemption.
Jesus never taught to get out of one sin you must sin again.
Marriage is a holy invention and sacred creation and as such it should be handled with the utmost of care
The strong assertion of the Lord in Mark 10:9 is that that no MAN should put asunder what God has joined. I humbly ask if that is not exactly what your council does here?
This teaching at best is a stumbling block to dear brothers and sisters in Christ who might be struggling in their walk with the Lord and in their marriages. At worst this teaching has done exactly what the Lord cautioned NOT to do which is ending marriages.
A careful study of first Corinthians 7 is prudent in this context.
These words I write are meant as caution. How many marriages have ended because of this teaching? How many children are questioning why daddy left mommy and said it was because Jesus said to? What view of the Father does that premise teach?
I commend you for not wanting to be wishy washy but I would add we must also stand for on absolute truth. Not my truth or yours but the Lord's truth alone.
Therefore what God has joined let no man separate.
Romans 7:2-3
King James Version
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
If our conclusion is to be: the wife who is put away, by an unjust, cold hearted husband, absent of the sin of sexual infidelity, must remain unmarried, then the future of such a woman (especially in early times) is very bleak. With little or no way to provide financially for herself and/or children, the "innocent" woman and possibly her children, are without much hope. She would not, according to Paul, be eligible for financial support from the church's treasury, seeing that that is reserved for widows. A sad situation indeed.
take it up with the one, who established these rules...
@@philipbuckley759 I wonder if your presumed understanding of God will hasn't mislead you. I also wonder if you would have been numbered amongst the Pharisees who stood by and condemned Jesus's disciples when then pick and ate the grain on the Sabbath. God did make the rules governing the sabbath, didn't he? God also made the regulations concerning who was allowed to eat the showbread that was prepared and offered for use in the Temple, didn't he? I wonder if you would have condemned David and his followers as they ate the forbidden showbread in the temple? What was the reason for overlooking the letter of the law? God's understanding of human need?
@@irksome100 it is your life and your judgement, but as for me, I intend to follow the teachings of the text.....
According to some if you stay with a partner like remarried you can lose your salvation. That is not a good teaching because salvation is a gift not something to keep or retain at all cost. Ephesians 2:8-9
I was married to a divorcee ,she divorced me. Am I still eligible to get married?
you may have an interesting case, but, once again, adultery, is not the Biblical exception.....it is fornication......
More on what the Bible teaches about divorce and remarriage. See also the first post below.
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. Jer 3:8
Yes, God divorced Israel for your adultery! ( later he divorced Judah as well )
Also did you know that God told the Israelites to divorce their pagan wives in Ezra?
Yet there are men that will tell you God NEVER allows divorce under any circumstance.
There is a lot of false teaching out there as Jesus said it would be (Matthew 24) and it not only comes from those who are blatantly easy to recognize, it also comes in the form of what people think Christianity should look like via the anabaptist type/kingdom people today.
Denominational religions and most of the Mennonite, Amish, German Baptist, Kingdom (etc) groups all have false teachings in their theology. See links exposing them at the end of this post.
One very dangerous teaching is that if a person was divorced prior to becoming a new creation in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 5), they teach that sin is not forgiven by God and a person must never marry anyone after conversion AND if they have, they are to divorce that person and some say, go back to the prior person.
In this they and many other kingdom groups are hypocritical as they hold marriage is a life long bond that cannot be broken for ANY reason. But as we will show you, that is a lie or how else did God become divorced, why did God order it in Ezra or why did God ever allow divorce as He did with Moses? ( these same groups rightly reject "once saved always saved" because they say you can break your agreement/covenant with God for salvation yet they say a marriage ...which is a covenant... that can NEVER be broken )
They cannot have it both ways!
Note: our stance is just as the Word instructs, we are against divorce if both parties are believers unless it be for fornication (Matthew 5:32). The other situation would be if an unbelieving couple married and one became a believer (born from above John 3:3) and the unbelieving spouse was not pleased to dwell with them and divorced them, they are not under bondage as per 1 Corinthians 7.
Jesus in his teaching on divorce was speaking to the belieing Jews.
This particular article is for those who have had divorce PRIOR to being a born again believer and made a new creation in Christ.
So let's look at 1 Corinthians 7:8-11 and see if Paul addresses anyone who has been divorced prior to conversion. Note: Corinth was a cess pool of seuxal sin so divorced people were surely part of the NT body there.
8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
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 or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
The greek word for 'unmarried' is:
agamos and it means 'unmarried'. Not married. In some cased, not married anymore.
That means the person is not currently married. It does not mean 'never married' because let's look at verse 11. Paul just finishes instructing these born again believers that they are to stay married and the wife is not to depart from her husband….
11 But if she depart, let her remain unmarried (agamos)
In today's language that would mean 'divorced'.
So verse 11 says if a woman who is married, (remember he's speaking to the born again believers) departs from her husband, let her remain 'unmarried/agamos' or be reconciled to her husband. So if a married woman departs from her husband, she is now agamos/unmarried/divorced.
Didn't Paul just address the unmarried prior to that in verse 8. He said 'to the unmarried/agamos'...that would mean people who are not currently married and could have in their unregenerate state departed from their spouse, or been departed from.
So let's look at all these verses together.
8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
He is instructing the unmarried (those who could have been previously divorced) and widows that it's best not to marry.
9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
He gives those who are unmarried/agamos/divorced permission to marry.
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 (agamos/divorced) or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
He tells the born again believing wives and husbands not to depart or put the other away.
So if it is a sin for a person who was divorced (put away or departed from) to remarry after conversion, then the theology of the plain people teaches that Paul (who was inspired by the Holy Spirit) is a liar.
Note: they teach marriage is ALWAYS for life but that cannot be true as we showed God was divorced and even Jesus told the woman she had 5 husbands. How can this be if you can not have multiple marriages in a lifetime? Did Jesus lie?
But back to the point here:
It is a dangerous theology to teach people that if they have divorce in their past and they become born from above (John 3:3) that they must leave the spouse they are with whether it was a spouse before the conversion or after.
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. (2 Corinthians 5:17)
ALL THINGS ARE NEW.
Hebrews 8 and Hebrews 10 tells us that He remembers our sins no more.
So if a woman was divorced prior to conversion and a man marries her, he is not marrying a divorced woman, he is marrying a 'new creation' as in 2 Corinthians 5:17
God and Moses dealt with divorce as did Jesus and Paul. The truth is that it is not the unforgivable sin these groups have made it based on the situation of course, as we have explained.
Note: After Jesus/Paul taught on divorce, there is no indication that people of that day then began to divorce there current husband or wife to go back to a past one. Imagine the turmoil. At 1 pm Tuesday, Jews could divorce and remarry per Moses law. Then at 2 pm that same day Jesus says, NO; so they all ran to divorce their current partners? No, it was not so!
This is a man made false way so do not be deceived by it. These groups look past MANY sins but they hone in on divorce and remarriage like a pack of vultures as it is their pet doctrine as Pharisee's of the day!
Do not be deceived by them!
Below is a link for a book on what the Bible actually teaches about d & r.
www.thefaithoncedelivered.info/Divorce.htm
Excellent book! And if I remember correctly, also by those that are Anabaptist
Pay this blind guide no attention. Else you fall into the ditch with him.
The main problem with your objection, and that of the article you reference, is that the interpretations and claims used are ahistorical. At root, they take Moses _over_ Jesus and what He taught. Tell us this-what nation did God remarry instead of Israel if His divorce was for the purpose of alienation instead of discipline? As Paul explains, even in Israel it was always the children of promise, by faith, to whom the covenant was reckoned and it remains the same today. Your author gets himself into a corner with his theology, having to support other Mosaic rulings as well, from slavery to the treatment of female prisoners to polygamy to the stoning of rebellious children. I guess we have to thank modern secular law for preventing Christians like him from continuing such past behaviors expected in civil law. Jesus’ teaching, and that of the book of Hebrews, about the concessions to hard hearts and the greater perfection in “You have heard ... but I say”-the new covenant-cannot be countenanced in his reasoning.
“Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one, ‘And to your Seed,’ who is Christ. And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.”
“For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.”
Yet your author blasts an objection pointing out the faults of such rulings in the covenant as Jesus did-not because of God but because of fallen humanity. The earliest Christians never teach the position that he claims. They teach divorce as for the purpose of discipline and potential repentance / reconciliation only, just as God used it with Israel. The “unmarried” in 1 Cor. 7 with the right to marry are not those who are divorced with a living spouse. Paul specifies that the only two options for them are remaining single or reconciling with their spouse. Tertullian comments on this directly, saying that Paul was certainly not granting marriage to the divorced “in the teeth of the primary precept.” The teaching in this video was thought of then as a _primary precept_ in the Christian life, despite the disciples fiercely reacting to it as a very difficult teaching--as meaning that it is better not to marry. In my grandparents’ time, even in the mainstream churches, divorce and remarriage carried a lot of stigma. It no longer does. Much has changed quickly. Did the Bible change? Certainly not.
(You are correct that a remarried spouse should not be taken back into a first marriage. The Scripture is explicit that this is an abomination to God, not man.)
Most in the remarriage camp, (which is most of Christianity today) cannot seem to find any scripture to support their remarriage position? They love to spiritualize scripture, contorting and distorting its plain teaching. The first law of hermeneutics, let scripture interpret scripture. The teachings of Jesus are clear on MDR, most just won't accept it. For the first 1500 years the early church fathers were all in agreement, as this Pastor is teaching. Remarriage after divorce is not allowed. God clearly states he hates divorce in Malachi 2. "For the Lord God of Israel says that he hates divorce, for it covers ones garment with violence."God desires Godly offspring, divorce and remarriage wrecks the family unit. This hard teaching, that remarriage is not allowed, as long as a covenant spouse is still alive, is rejected by most today, I believe because of hard hearts. John the Baptist, lost his head for this very teaching. Calling adulteress remarriages to account. 1st Corinthians 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom or God? Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. The only teaching that is in harmony with scripture on remarriage after divorce, not being adultery, is the death of a covenant spouse. One cannot remain in an adulterous remarriage as long as a covenant spouse is still alive. God forgives all sin that is repented of!
Malachi 2 is about divorcing a faithful spouse. That is treacherous. God desires a GODLY seed. Even God divorced with reason.
John the Baptist never told Herod that he shouldn’t have divorced his wife. He said it was unlawful to have his brothers wife! That was the law! It was wrong to marry your living brothers wife. Incestual really. If John was making a new law then how would Herod have known he was disobeying??? It would have been new to him! It is not in the law! Do you are saying all people that were already divorced or remarried were automatically in sin. Chaos and not seen anywhere
To one who says all remarriage after any first divorce is a sin taking you to hell:
Jesus wasn’t making new laws. -Anymore than he told us to poke out our eyes. He was speaking to the heart of the issues. It’s why marrying a divorced man is MISSING from his words! You must stop picking what to use as a weapon from the Bible. How you judge is how you will be judged. One could just as easy say that no nonvirginal women can marry, going by Paul’s words and bc neither he or Jesus said they could. (Paul says in I Corinthians 7 that virgin and widowed women can marry and not sin. If we include the impure in the “unmarried “ then we must surely also include some divorced people because Paul used that SAME word to describe a woman who left her husband. Obviously, “unmarried can be a descriptive word for the divorced.)
I think you also need to ask yourselves: were all divorced and remarried people automatically in sin when (you think) Jesus spoke this new doctrine? When (you think) John spoke it to Herod then how was Herod to have known before if it was just then spoken and not the law??
These severe marriage doctrines are a narrative that is not really seen in the Bible. There aren’t cases of people being told to leave their believing spouse and family and go back to their unsaved past to find an ex that left. Or telling the one that is married to a “remarried” person that they are actually free to leave and go get a new spouse.
We must use discernment. Just as most can see that all killing is not murder; all remarriage after divorce is not sin.
Anyone saying someone should leave their faithful spouse and they can go have another is not speaking to the heart of the issue.
We aren’t to sin like that so that grace may abound.
Use wisdom and don’t go cherry picking through the Bible to feel secure in false works that do not save.