Don't Blame God for Your Divorce
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
- #marriage #divorce #restoration #reconciliation
In this episode of the Purposed Marriage podcast, we discuss the temptation individuals face to blame God for their personal suffering while in the midst of divorce.
Follow us on our blog!
www.purposedmarriage.org
RSS Feed
/ sounds.rss
Follow us on iTunes
itunes.apple.c...
Follow us on SoundCloud
/ purposed-marriage
Follow us on TuneIn Radio
tun.in/pjmKR
Follow us on Twitter
/ purposedmarriag
Follow us on Facebook
/ purposedmarriage
Follow us on Instagram
/ purposedmarriage
Follow us on our blog!
www.purposedmarriage.org
RSS Feed
/ sounds.rss
Follow us on iTunes
itunes.apple.c...
Follow us on SoundCloud
/ purposed-marriage
Follow us on TuneIn Radio
tun.in/pjmKR
Follow us on Twitter
/ purposedmarriag
Follow us on Facebook
/ purposedmarriage
Follow us on Instagram
/ purposedmarriage
I was listening to your podcast tonight and had fallen asleep with about 15 minutes left and was awakened while you were reading my prayer request. God even cares about the little things! What an amazing God we serve, I regret it’s taking what has happened for me to see it but better than to never have seen it and be an asleep Christian (no pun intended). Restored or not he has my life from now until the day he calls me home. Thank you so much for your ministry. I will continue to listen for new episodes but also go back through and listen as they are so encouraging. God bless you both in your ministry.
My heart is heavy for all these prayer requests, all from men. Praying for these wives to return to the companion of their youth. Deliverance and restoration by the hand of the Almighty. We declare His faithfulness.
Thank you for praying for my family!
I love the on air prayer that Tommy and Amy do at the end of the show. An army of prayer warriors is so powerful. I'm going to commit to pray after every episode for all the on air requests and even if there were ones that weren't mentioned. I've been standing for 6 years and wouldn't have made it this far without the prayer I've received from family, small group and some of my friends. Maybe Tommy and Amy could do a segment on all the answered prayers. It would not only be an encouragment to the ones still standing but we can rejoice in the victory that God has given! Blessings to all! For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
Matthew 18:20 NIV
Thank you for praying for us!
please
pray
for Colie and Manuela
Wasn't his fault we did it ourselves not knowing His ways to love each other.
I wish you guys would come back and post again. Praying everything is alright with you guys
Sorry, I don't believe your assessment is correct in that if either a wife or a husband is faltering in adhering to the Biblical design for marriage that their failure is justification for the other spouse to divorce. Short of committing adultery, there is no justification for divorce. If we justify one spouse filing for divorce due to the others' fault, which "sin" do we use as that justification? Can I divorce my wife because she falls short of respecting me? Is she justified in divorcing me because my business failed and she had to return to work?
The bottom line is that the one who filed for divorce is under satan's deception, and they will use any reason as justification, but short of adultery - there is no Biblical justification! Period.
As you stated it in this episode, it seems like you're casting blame on the spouse who failed to be the perfect Biblical spouse. That's not Biblical. That's am unfair burden on the left behind spouse.
Thank you for your comment Chris. We are in no way saying that the stander should be blaming his or herself if a sinful, prodigal spouse has left the marriage. Rather, we should all be examining our own hearts and being attentive to what God is attempting to teach us in the midst of suffering. Self-reflection and taking stock of oneself is a productive exercise in the midst of marital trauma. We oftentimes have blinders on and only see the fault in the life of our spouse. Scripture warns about this judgmental attitude.
We don't justify a husband or wive leaving the marriage because of the partner's failures. Many do this, but it is not biblical. To be clear, the only allowance for divorce (according to scripture) is if adultery or abandonment has occurred. Divorce doesn't have to be the consequence. Restoration, reconciliation and healing can certainly occur. This is our testimony and what we advocate for.
I'm requesting pray in the Name of Jesus for a breakthrough in my marriage being restored - Amen!
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.
Wow, that is an impressively well thought-out and well written comment! I like it but I have some concerns about it too.
It strikes me how much effort we can all go to to analyze behavior regarding divorce and marriage. This comment is a prime example.
Isn't it unfortunate that the Bible doesn't expound in meticulous and unequivocal terms when divorce is permitted? Why not replace some genealogies or lamenting minor prophets with some concrete rules about marriage? Too bad it's not written like the legal agreement on a new credit card - 20 pages in a small font covering almost every conceivable situation. Why didn't God do that? Then we wouldn't be discussing this. Why not?
Ah, but I think we know why God didn't do that. If it were a set of rules we'd still be looking for an escape clause somewhere in a small footnote!
Instead, he wanted our heart in the right place, not just our actions. Read the Sermon on the Mount: Turn the other cheek when someone hurts you. Give extra to someone who steals from you. Love your enemy! That is a high calling indeed. Just apply that same high calling to marriage.
If someone is looking for justification for divorce based on some extensive combination of Bible verses and translations, their heart needs adjusting. There is no formula for that. It's better achieved without a formula. That is exactly what we have - no meticulous formula for how to behave. Instead we have an example to follow in Christ. A tough one but a great one - give even our very lives to love our spouse. A high calling indeed.
@@dnaphysics Jesus's teachings in regard to adultery, and the results of committing adultery, without repentance, are very specific and detailed in the scriptures.