Become one flesh

Sorry... off-topic...

Hey Dr. Bob!

I just found out that my church's World Changers group is going to Casper, WY this next summer! Might have to swing by and meet you if I end up driving them!

Now I return you to your regularly scheduled debate.

 

Ralph, you speak as one who hasn't ever insulted anyone. Not true, my friend.

 

And this "false doctrine"? Is not marriage honourable above all things? And "surprizingly" you call that "false doctrine"!!</font>[/QUOTE]Yet another failure of PoR to address the fact that KJVOism is false doctrine. Notice how he did the "bait and switch" tactic there? Typical KJVOist tactic whenever confronted.

Now, getting to the issue that PoR switched to: Yes, if you're saying that divorce in the case of sexual immorality is a sin, then yes, you're espousing false doctrine, because it is contrary to what the Bible teaches. The bible permits divorce in cases of sexual immorality. While it is not God's desire for a marriage to end, God permits it in this case. It is not a sin to divorce your spouse if he/she has committed adultery.

 

Ralph,

Well, are they right? Does God let us divorce?

How many times?

;o)

 

Ralph,

Now that IS a QUESTION ...


Wayne

 

Again, we go back ti Mosaic law. Now, why did God use Moses to convey the law to Israel? Because the vast majority of the people were frightened to hear the voice of God Himself. They asked Him to give His commands to Moses, who would pass them on to the public. Therefore, in the case of divorce, the man Moses wasn't separate from the law.

Has anyone stopped to think that the mistake/sin may not have been so much in the divorce as it was in the couple becoming married in the first place, that they were trying to join vinegar and baking soda together in the mistaken assumption that a ceremony and piece of paper would iron out all their differences? I think we've all seen couples try this, with one being strongly Baptist & the other being strongly Catholic, for instance.

 

Roby,

"Has anyone stopped to think that the mistake/sin may not have been so much in the divorce as it was in the couple becoming married in the first place":
Yes!

Then I humbly read God's word on the subject. I humbly challenge you to finish reading through God's Word ...

In Christ,

Wayne

 

I have a question:

Matthew 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

The word used for both “put away” & “divorced” is G630 and is apparently from a combination of G575 + G3089 = G630:

G630
apoluo¯
ap-ol-oo’-o
From G575 and G3089; to free fully, that is, (literally) relieve, release, dismiss (reflexively depart), or (figuratively) let die, pardon, or (specifically) divorce: - (let) depart, dismiss, divorce, forgive, let go, loose, put (send) away, release, set at liberty.

I have provided definitions for #G575 & #G3089 below:

G575
apo
apo’
A primary particle; “off”, that is, away (from something near), in various senses (of place, time, or relation; literally or figuratively): - (X here-) after, ago, at, because of, before, by (the space of), for (-th), from, in, (out) of, off, (up-) on (-ce), since, with. In composition (as a prefix) it usually denotes separation, departure, cessation, completion, reversal, etc.

G3089
luo¯
loo’-o
A primary verb; to “loosen” (literally or figuratively): - break (up), destroy, dissolve, (un-) loose, melt, put off. Compare G4486.


1Corinthians 7:27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.

The word used for the first “loosed” is G3080:

G3080
lusis
loo'-sis
From G3089; a loosening, that is, (specifically) divorce: - to be loosed.

But the word for the second “loosed” is G3089 and is followed by “from” G575 which are the same two words that are found in G630.

So what would this mean? If we can assume that Paul is speaking about the divorced in the latter half of v27 then what would we make of the first part of v28?

1Corinthians 7:28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.

Do these verses say that when one comes to Christ as a single virgin, seek not to be married? If you come to Christ married seek not a divorce, if you come to Christ as a divorced single, seek not to be remarried? But if you do remarry you have not sinned and if a virgin marries they have not sinned?

 

sounds like you are doing a word study for class

You should start with verse 25? That might indicate the context of his words ...

 

Back to Roby,

"the ... sin may ... have been ... in the couple becoming married in the first place"
[edited to move the emphasis to the subject and not the corallary]

I do not know where Marriage being a sin is coming from, but I hear that alot lately.

I have only found Biblical support that God ordained marriage unconditionally.

"From contents to maps", God seems clear on the subject.
He even says, "I hate divorce." (Or, "For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away" (KJV). Mal 2:16

You will have to show me in scripture that God says marriage is the sin ...

 

That is what has got me wondering, 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 are sandwiched between verses concerning virgins, yet to me, Paul is speaking about the married and the divorced here?

 

Billy

The term for wife was also the term for fiancee ... Soooo Paul could have meant that if you decide not to marry and put away your fiancee (later Saint Sugustine did this), then do not marry.

Unfortunately, in our culture we have a low view of marriage ...

However, PAUL did say that this was from him and from the context it was because of the problems then: Many Christians were slaves and could have their families taken from them ... a better position to be in IS TO BE single ...

 

Question....!? If a person(for this discussion lets say "saved" person)is put away by an unbelieving OR "professed" believing spouse and divorced from that person unwillingly and without remedy....AND...the one that did the "putting away" goes on and "remarries" AFTER putting away his/her believing spouse,does this mean that the one that was "put out" is doomed to a life of singleness?OR....can the one that was "put away" remarry scripturally after the former spouse has remarried?Be careful how you answer this or you may be condemning innocent people to a life that it is quite possible God doesn't intend for them.
For the record....and I shudder to even say this on this board but God knows my heart....I am a born again Bible Believing Christian that has suffered being married to and "put away" by two women in my past.One of them was a professing christian,the other was not.Both of them have gone on to be remarried after they filed for and got divorced from me....one of them has remarried several times since(and she was the "professing" christian).I am single right now(but engaged to a wonderful Christian woman)and trying to faithfully live for the Lord.Just curious what everybodies opinions are.I will say that I am at peace with the Lord regarding what I personally believe about this subject,but I enjoy entertaining intelligent discussion about the subject.

Bro.Greg