AUTHOR'S RESPONSE TO READER'S SECOND WRITING
Does Accepting The Messiah As One's Saviour Alter
One's Marital Status?
Hi Frank
A few more clarifying comments and questions?
AUTHOR:
Seeing that Matthew
5:32 also states that a man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery,
implying that the divorced woman also commits adultery in her marriage to such
a man, is it not the case that a divorced woman is not allowed to marry again?
READER:
Yes and no. At the end
of my article, I quote scripture where Jesus said "neither do I condemn
thee, go and sin no more." If a woman was once guilty of adultery --- and
perhaps, if she was married at the time, her husband consequently divorced her
with just, biblical cause --- but then, later, she repents and accepts Christ
as her Lord and Saviour, she then starts a new life with a new, clean moral
slate (that's what true forgiveness really means!). Therefore, since she is
then a single person, she would be free to re-marry if reconciliation with her
former husband was impossible.
Is it the case that accepting the Messiah as one's Master and Saviour alters one's marital status?
If it was so then all new believers, previously married just before accepting the Messiah, would need to marry again if they desired to live a married life from the moment they became a believer. Otherwise if they just returned to the person who was their spouse just before they accepted the Messiah, and continued on their married life as before, they would be engaging in fornication! And if the person they were married to just before they accepted the Messiah was an unbeliever they would be forbidden from returning to such a person in marriage, seeing that believers are forbidden from marrying unbelievers!
It seems to me that accepting the Messiah as one's Saviour does not change, in any way, one's marital status. For we do not have a command from the Almighty that new believers should marry again if they were married just before they became believers. Also, we note the scriptural acknowledgement of marriages between believers and unbelievers, indicating that these marriages were effected prior to one of those so married becoming a believer. Seeing that believers are forbidden from marrying unbelievers.
It therefore seems to me that a repentant woman who was previously an adulteress would have ceased her adultery at the time she accepted the Messiah as her Saviour. If her adultery involved continually living with a man not her lawful husband, then she would have to have ceased living with this man. And if her lawful husband refused to be reconciled with her, her lawful husband having divorced her, then she would have to live as a single woman, without a husband, in order to be compliant with Matthew 5:32.
It further seems to me that she would only be allowed to marry again on the death of her lawful husband, which is when a married woman ceases to be under the authority of her husband.
Matthew 5:17-19 reads,
5:17Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I
didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill. 5:18For most assuredly,
I tell you, until Heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or
one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things
are accomplished. 5:19Whoever, therefore,
shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall
be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them
shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
Deuteronomy 24:1-2 reads,
24:1When
a man takes a wife, and marries her, then it shall be, if she find no favor in
his eyes, because he has found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall
write her a bill of divorce, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his
house. 24:2When she is departed
out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
Seeing that Christ did not come to destroy any aspect of the Law, and
seeing that the Law allowed a validly divorced woman to become another man's
wife, it indeed remains the case that validly divorced woman can become another
man's wife. Therefore, if a woman is divorced by her husband on the ground of
her sexual immorality, she may indeed become wife to another man in a
subsequent marriage valid before the Almighty. She therefore does not need to
live the rest of her life as a single woman if indeed validly divorced from her
husband.]
Is A Validly Divorced Woman Allowed To Marry Again
On Account Of Her Repentance?
AUTHOR:
And seeing that any
man marrying her after her divorce commits adultery, is it not the case that
she is forbidden from being married again, lest no man commit adultery on her
account?
READER:
Yes, unless she honestly
and sincerely repents of her past misdeeds and thereby becomes a new creature
in Christ. If she really, truly does that, then she should reconcile with her
former husband if at all possible. But, if reconciliation is impossible, she is
free to re-marry for two very important reasons. First, she is truly forgiven
by God for all of her past transgressions, including her adultery; therefore,
she is a new creature in Christ starting all over again with a clean, moral
slate. That is why the apostle Paul said that we should put our past failures
and shortcomings behind us, and look forward to the future as a new creature in
Christ. Secondly, she is free to re-marry because, in God's eyes, she is now
single.
Punishment Is Effected Against Offences
Exodus 21:22-25 reads,
21:22"If
men fight and hurt a pregnant woman so that she gives birth prematurely, and
yet no harm follows, he shall be surely fined as much as the woman's husband
demands and the judges allow. 21:23But
if any harm follows, then you must take life for life, 21:24eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for
hand, foot for foot, 21:25burning
for burning, wound for wound, and bruise for bruise.
If a man has committed the offence referred to above, and has lost a part of his body in punishment for his offence, and subsequently repents of all his sins and accepts the Messiah as his Saviour, are the lost parts of his body restored to him? Or does he continue living his life in a forgiven state but without the lost parts of his body?
Is It Possible To Enter Into Life Without A Part Of
One's Body?
Matthew 5:27-30 reads,
5:27"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit
adultery;' 5:28but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust
after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart. 5:29If your right eye
causes you to stumble, pluck it out and cast it from you. For it is profitable
for you that one of your members should perish, and not your whole body be cast
into Gehinnom. 5:30If your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off, and
cast it from you: for it is profitable for you that one of your members should
perish, and not your whole body go into Gehinnom.
Is it therefore not the case that some people, who had previously stumbled, do indeed enter into life without portions of their body? Implying that though one is forgiven for having stumbled (sinned), the penalty effected against them, the loss of a part of their body, stands nevertheless? Such that a former adulteress who was divorced by her husband, on account of her adultery, prior to her becoming a believer, is forgiven by the Almighty of her sin of adultery, but nevertheless continues living with the effect of the penalty against her?
Penalty Against Adultery Stands
My persuasion is that she is forgiven of her sin of adultery, and her other sins. Nevertheless the penalty of her past adultery still stands.
Are Unlawful Divorces Valid In The Almighty's Eyes?
AUTHOR:
And if she was
divorced illegally, meaning on a ground not involving her committing sexual
immorality, is it not the case that her divorce, by being illegal, is null and
void?
READER:
Not at all!!! Please
keep in mind that for a contract or covenant to be valid and
morally-enforceable, it must be agreed to by both parties to the (marriage)
contract. If one party to the contract violates any of the terms to the
contract, or even outright abolishes or cancels the contract, then, of course,
the other (offended) party is no longer obligated to the contract either
because the contract no longer exists. If a contract or covenant no longer
exists, then how can a person still be obligated to it?
Unlawful Divorces Are Null And Void Before The
Almighty
Matthew 19:6 reads, in part,
What therefore the
Mighty One has joined together, don't let man tear apart.
It therefore appears that in a lawful marriage, one recognised by the Almighty, man has no authority to dissolve such a marriage, despite any purported attempts to do so. Such that any action that purports to sever such a marriage union is null and void before the Almighty.
Only if a marriage union is not effected by the Almighty, such as marriages contrary to the Almighty word, does man have authority to dissolve it. But man is devoid of the Almighty's authority to dissolve marriage unions that he has effected.
This is why I say that human divorce of valid marriages, human divorce contrary to the Almighty's word, is indeed null and void. Human divorce is valid only in a marriage that the Almighty has not effected. Such as those contrary to his word. For example, a believer marrying an unbeliever.
Even In Some Human Laws A Frustrated Contract Is Not
Necessarily Annulled
Also, it should be noted that even human contract law, at least English contract law, recognises the principle that the frustration of a contract does not necessarily render a contract annulled or voided. The contract still exists, only that the frustrating act renders it unenforceable.
Who Is Responsible For An Unjust Divorce?
AUTHOR:
Such that even though
her husband considers her divorced from him, in reality, in the Almighty's
eyes, she is still legally his wife?
READER:
I think God would
believe that she should still be his wife even though the husband would not see
it that way.
God is a God of reason
and logic and rationality. Therefore, if in reality, the husband has continued
on with his life after unfairly divorcing his wife, perhaps even re-marrying,
then how in the world could God hold the poor victim of the unjust divorce
responsible for what has happened? Wouldn't it make more sense for God to hold
the offending party responsible for the sin that occurred, rather than punishing
or blaming the offended party by condemning them to a lifetime of loneliness
and frustration as a single person? Let's never forget that each and every
person is responsible for their own deeds and misdeeds only; no one else's!!
An Errant Husband Is Responsible For Unjustly
Divorcing His Wife
The unjustly divorced woman is not responsible for her divorce. Her sinning husband is the one responsible for the unjust divorce. Her husband is therefore sinning against her.
Unjustly Divorced Wife Has No Authority To Commit
Sin On Account Of Her Husband's Sin Against Her
Nevertheless, just because one sins against another does not give the other the authority to go and commit her own sin. For if the unjustly divorced wife lives in purported marriage with another man, she is indeed termed an adulteress. This is what I understand the Messiah meant by his comments in Matthew 5:31-32. The unjustly divorced wife is driven into adultery by her sinning husband, thereby becoming an adulteress.
Unjustly Divorced Wife Should Live The Life Of A
Righteous Single Woman
And seeing that she is called an adulteress in her new relationship, it is indeed implied that she should not be involved in such a relationship. She should not marry again, for her marriage to her sinning husband is still valid in the Almighty's eyes. Her lot, because of her husband's sin against her, is therefore to live the life of a righteous single woman. And she must continue to so live as a righteous single woman until such time as either her husband repents of his sin against her, or he dies, at which point she is freed from being under his authority, and can marry again.
The Almighty Will Strengthen An Unjustly Divorced
Woman To Live Righteously Before Him
It should also be noted that the Almighty imparts his Spirit to his children. And one of the fruits of the Spirit is self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). It seems to me that the Almighty will indeed impart such a woman, so sinned against by her husband, adequate self-control to facilitate her living her life righteously as a single woman. After all, the Almighty desires that all his children live righteously. He therefore will make it possible for such a woman to live righteously before him.
Also, Matthew 19:11-12 reads,
19:11But
he said to them, "Not all men can receive this
saying, but they to whom it is given. 19:12For there are eunuchs, who were born that way from their
mother's womb, and there are eunuchs, who were made eunuchs by men: and there
are eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the
There are therefore believers who live single lives, and do so righteously before the Almighty. For the Almighty gives them this gift of being able to live righteous single lives before him.
Eunuchs Who Have Been Made Eunuchs By Men
It should also be noted that there are eunuchs (single people) who are made eunuchs by men. It seems that an unjustly divorced woman is a "eunuch" who has been made a "eunuch" by a man, her offending husband.
The Life Of A Single Person Is Not Necessarily
Miserable
Also, it does not appear to be the case that the life of a single person is necessarily a miserable, lonely and frustrating one. Was not the Messiah single? Was he miserable, lonely and frustrated? Was not Paul single? Was he miserable, lonely and frustrated? Just because one is single does not necessarily mean that that one's life is miserable, lonely or frustrating.
AUTHOR:
She must strive not to
add her own sin to her husband's sin against her. She must strive to walk
righteously even though she is being wronged by her husband's sin. She must
therefore not commit adultery by marrying or having sex with another man.
READER:
Why should the wife, who
has been divorced without just biblical cause, be punished for the sins of her
former husband? For that is precisely what would be happening to the poor
victim in this case because you would be condemning her to a very, very long
lifetime of loneliness, frustration, unfulfillment, aloneness, etc., etc., if
she was not allowed to re-marry! That would be so incredibly cruel and unfair
and unjust!!! (Of course, sex without marriage would quite obviously be
adultery.)
Actually, such thinking
is a direct insult to the integrity and fairness of God Himself because in His
precious, Holy Word, He repeatedly states through Word and Example that He is a
Just and Holy God Who will judge everyone with absolute fairness and justness;
everyone will reap what they sow, and everyone will be judged according to
their works, i.e., deeds and misdeeds. It is absolutely impossible --- because
of His Holy Character --- for God to hold a person accountable in any way
whatsoever for the sins and wrongdoing of someone else. Therefore, if a woman's
husband divorces her without just biblical cause, it is he who will be judged
by God for wrongdoing, not the woman, i.e., the victim. Therefore, a woman who
has been unfairly divorced without just, biblical cause is free to re-marry since
she is no longer bound to a marriage contract or covenant.
It Is The Offending Husband Who Is Unjust, Not The
Almighty
The issue here is not the Almighty being unjust or unfair to the wife. It is about the offending husband being unjust and unfair to his wife, by unjustly and unfairly divorcing her.
Righteous People Suffer Unjustly With The Almighty's
Permission
Matthew 5:10-12 reads,
5:10"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for
righteousness' sake, for theirs is the
5:11"Blessed are you when people reproach you, persecute
you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
5:12"Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for great is your
reward in Heaven. For that is how they persecuted the prophets who were before
you.
It should therefore be clear that righteous people do indeed suffer unjustly in this world, and the Almighty allows them to suffer. He is not unjust or unfair for allowing them to so suffer. He has instead promised to reward them for their unjust suffering, promising them his kingdom.
An Unjustly Divorced Woman Who Does Not Marry Again
For The Sake Of The Kingdom Will Be Rewarded
A woman unjustly divorced surely suffers in this world with the Almighty's permission. But by continuing to live a righteous life, meaning not having sex with another entity while her offending husband is still alive, she is securing the promise that the Almighty has given to all who suffer for righteousness' sake - the kingdom of the Almighty.
Is Unlawful Marriage More Important Than Securing
The Promise Of The Kingdom?
What is more important: unlawful marriage in this life, or securing the promise of the kingdom of the Almighty?
Matthew 10:39 reads,
10:39He who finds his life will lose it; and he who loses his life
for my sake will find it.
Matthew 16:24-27 reads,
16:24Then
Yah'shuah said to his disciples, "If any man
desires to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and
follow me. 16:25For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and
whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it. 16:26For what will it
profit a man, if he will gain the whole world, and forfeit his life? Or what
will a man give in exchange for his life? 16:27For the Son of Man will come in the glory of his Father with
his angels, and then will he render to every man according to his deeds.
Matthew 19:16-19 reads,
19:16Behold,
one came to him and said, "Good teacher, what good thing shall I do, that
I may have eternal life?"
19:17He
said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is
good but one, that is, the Mighty One. But if you want to enter into life, keep
the commandments."
19:18He
said to him, "Which ones?"
Yah'shuah said, "You
shall not kill. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall
not offer false testimony. 19:19Honor your father and mother. And, you shall love your
neighbor as yourself."
Matthew 19:29 reads,
19:29Everyone who has left houses, or brothers, or sisters, or
father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, will
receive one hundred times, and will inherit eternal life.
Unjustly Divorced Woman Should Choose Her Continued
Unjust Suffering For The Sake Of The Kingdom
It therefore seems to me that the unjustly divorced woman should choose the kingdom of the Almighty, rather than a better physical life in this world. For if she marries again, while her offending husband refuses to take her back into his household, she will indeed be committing adultery, according to the Messiah's words in Matthew 5:32. But if she does not marry, thereby sacrificing a life of marriage, doing so for the sake of the Messiah and for the kingdom, she will indeed be rewarded by the Almighty with eternal life in the Almighty's kingdom.
She should therefore choose to continue suffering unjustly, for the sake of the Messiah and the kingdom, and thereby secure eternal life in the Almighty's kingdom. For gaining the whole world, or even a small part of it in illicit marriage, cannot be compared to the alternative of eternal life in the Almighty's kingdom.
Is Not A Husband In Authority Over His Wife?
AUTHOR:
Both Luke 16:18 and
Matthew 5:32 speak of a man divorcing his wife and marrying again. They do not
speak of a woman divorcing her husband and marrying again.
READER:
Gal 3:28
28 There is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. (KJV)
There is neither male
nor female; God judges all of us on an absolutely equal basis!! Accordingly,
whatever moral instruction applies to men also applies to women, and vice
versa!!
The Almighty has established an authority structure in the family, with the man being head over his wife. Even as the Messiah is head over his household of believers. (Ephesians 5:25-33.)
A Wife Does Not Have The Almighty's Authority To
Remove Herself From Under Her Husband's Authority
And just as a believer in the Messiah's household has no authority from the Almighty to remove himself or herself from the Messiah's household, and enter into another one, so also does a wife have no authority from the Almighty to remove herself from her husband's authority and come under the authority of another man.
A believer can, in contravention of the Almighty's word, separate himself or herself from the Messiah. Even as a wife can, in contravention of the Almighty's word, separate herself from her husband. But the point is that such actions have no authority from the Almighty. Those who do such things are therefore not walking in the Almighty's righteousness.
Is It Horrible And Terribly Unfair To Deny A Wife
Authority To Divorce Her Husband?
AUTHOR:
It therefore appears
that a husband can legally divorce his wife on account of her sexual
immorality, but a wife cannot legally divorce her husband on account of his
sexual immorality.
READER:
With all due respect and
brotherly love, I disagree with every fiber of my being at even considering
such a horrible and terribly-unfair thought!!!
Gal 3:28
28 There is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. (KJV)
Galatians 3:28 Is Talking About Salvation, Not
Household Authority
Galatians 3:28 is not talking about the authority structure that the Almighty has established in the human household. It is talking about salvation!
In other words, with respect to salvation, the Jew has no advantage over the Greek, the free has no advantage over the bonded, and the male has no advantage over the female. All human beings are one and the same with respect to their salvation, with none having any advantage over the other.
Nevertheless, even in the Messiah's household, there are differing degrees of gifts or service, with some in greater authority than others. Likewise, in human households, there are differing degrees of authority. With the man as head over his wife. And parents having authority over their children.
AUTHOR:
They will therefore
recognise that they, or other men, have no authority from the Almighty to
divorce them one from another. Implying that only the Almighty has authority to
break their marriage covenant.
READER:
But, obviously man can
tear apart what God has joined together or otherwise it would have been an
absurdity for God to say "let no man tear them apart." So, then, if
the reality is that they have been torn apart, i.e., divorced, then the
marriage covenant, by definition, is null and void. If reconciliation is
impossible due to the continued intransigence of the offending party, then the
victim, i.e., the offended party, is, in reality, single and therefore free to
re-marry.
Whose word should hold sway? Human words or the Almighty's words?
Should the Almighty's words in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9 hold sway, that it is adultery to marry a woman unjustly divorced or put away? Or should contrary human words hold sway?
Who is greater - the Almighty or human beings? Especially human beings speaking contrary words?
Does The Almighty Give Separated Married Believers
The OPTION Of Not Reconciling?
READER:
Yes, I agree that she
should remain single or be reconciled to her husband in such instances. But,
please note that the Bible gives the separated believers the option of not
reconciling. Allow me to quote from my divorce article again:
QUOTE
1 Cor 7:10-11
10 And unto the married
I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she
depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not
the husband put away his wife. KJV
According to this
passage, if both husband and wife are Christian believers, and one of them
leaves the other, they are commanded to remain unmarried or be reconciled with
their spouse; and the person who is deserted should not seek a divorce.
However, if the person who leaves should ultimately seek and be granted a
divorce decree, then, of course, the marriage covenant is broken and,
therefore, is no longer valid, and the offended partner is under no further
obligation and is free to re-marry.
END QUOTE
Believers Have NO OPTION To Avoid Reconciliation
With Other Believers
It is my view that the Almighty gives no option to believers not to be reconciled to one another. For Matthew 5:23-24 shows that failure to reconcile with one's brother frustrates one's fellowship with the Almighty. And if one no longer has fellowship with the Almighty they are no longer a disciple of the Messiah!
Paul Was Giving His Own Opinion In Giving Believers
An Option To Avoid Reconciliation
It is therefore my view that Paul was giving his own personal opinion in 1 Corinthian 7:11, where he - Paul - was giving an option to married believers of not being reconciled to one another.
The Messiah's View Prevails Over That Of His
Servants
And where there appears to be a difference of opinion between the Messiah and one of his servants, it is the Messiah's word that prevails, seeing that the Messiah is the Master. Did not Paul acknowledge the superiority of the Messiah over his servants in 1 Corinthians 1:10-13 and the whole of 1 Corinthians 1-4?
This is why I think that 1 Corinthians 7:11 was Paul's personal opinion, where he gives an option, as it does not appear to be in harmony with the Messiah's words in Matthew 5:23-24, where the Messiah gives no option.
Can Believers Sever Their Marriages On A Ground Not
Involving Sexual Immorality?
AUTHOR:
For Matthew 5:23-24
commands believers to be reconciled to one another if they are to continue
being in the Father's fellowship. But if the party responsible for the
estrangement does not reconcile to the other, and thereby does not abide in the
Messiah's words, he or she ceases to be a disciple of the Messiah. And by so
ceasing to be a disciple of the Messiah his or her marriage then becomes one
between a believer and an unbeliever.
READER:
You are correct in that
believers should forgive and reconcile.
However, it is possible
for a person to forgive their spouse and therefore feel no ill will towards
them, but still not wish to reconcile back into a married state with them for a
variety of reasons. If that is the case, then the scripture above commands them
to remain unmarried until if and when they do reconcile.
The Messiah's Disciples MUST Abide By His Words
Should lawfully married people, who are also believers, deny themselves from one another? Can believers simply decide to sever their marriage on a ground not including sexual immorality?
I think not! For if they really consider themselves disciples of the Messiah, they will abide by the Messiah's words. But if they do not abide by the Messiah's words, and still think that they are the Messiah's disciples, they should remember John 8:31, which reads,
If you remain in my
word, then you are truly my disciples.
And John 15:1-10, which reads,
15:1"I am the true vine, and my Father is the farmer. 15:2Every branch in me
that doesn't bear fruit, he takes away. Every branch that bears fruit, he
prunes, that it may bear more fruit. 15:3You are already pruned clean because of the word which I have
spoken to you. 15:4Remain in me, and I in you. As the branch can't bear fruit by
itself, unless it remains in the vine, so neither can you, unless you remain in
me. 15:5I am the vine. You are the branches. He who remains in me,
and I in him, the same bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. 15:6If a man doesn't
remain in me, he is thrown out as a branch, and is withered; and they gather
them, throw them into the fire, and they are burned. 15:7If you remain in
me, and my words remain in you, you will ask whatever you desire, and it will
be done to you. 15:8In this is my Father glorified, that you bear much fruit; and
so you will be my disciples. 15:9Even as the Father has loved me, I also have loved you.
Remain in my love. 15:10If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love; even
as I have kept my Father's commandments, and remain in his love.
Assessing Whether A Person Is Speaking Under The
Inspiration Of The Almighty
AUTHOR:
1 Corinthians 7:12
clearly states that the succeeding comments are not the Almighty's comments,
but a man's comments - Paul's comments.
READER:
Yes, but Paul was
speaking under the authority and inspiration of God. Are you saying then that
this passage should not be in the Bible because it is a false representation of
God's Will?
How do you assess whether any person is speaking under the inspiration of the Almighty?
Paul himself has stated that he is not giving the Almighty's command, but his own view. Is one to disregard these clear words of Paul, and still attribute to the Almighty words that even Paul, the author, does not? Who was better placed to know whether these words were from the Almighty? Paul, the author, or his readers?
Those Saying That 1 Corinthians 7:12 Was Inspired
Contradict Paul's Clear Words
If one says that these words are the Almighty's words then they clearly contradict Paul's words. And if they do not accept Paul's clear words here, what is their basis for accepting some of Paul's words and rejecting others?
Does 1 Corinthians 7:12-15 Authorise Believers To
Divorce Their Unbelieving Spouses?
AUTHOR:
Matthew 19:6 clearly
states that what the Almighty has joined man has no authority to tear apart.
Therefore the comments in 1 Corinthians 7:12-15 have no authority from the
Almighty allowing a believer to divorce an unbeliever in a marriage valid
before the Almighty's eyes!
READER:
That's not quite what
Paul said. Actually, Paul told believers to remain married to unbelievers if
the unbelieving partner was willing to do so. However, Paul went on to say that
if the unbelieving spouse deserted the marriage and got a divorce, then, of
course, the believing spouse would be blameless and single, and therefore free
to re-marry.
I agree that Paul did not tell believers married to unbelievers to divorce them. But some misconstrue these words of Paul as being the Almighty's authority for believers to divorce unbelievers lawfully married to them!
Does 1 Corinthians 7:12-15 Give A Deserted Believer
Authority To Marry Again?
AUTHOR:
Also, Paul's words in
1 Corinthians 7:12-15 do not speak of a believer who has been abandoned in his
or her marriage marrying again. His comments are silent on this matter of
marrying again if abandoned by one's unbelieving spouse.
READER:
Then what did Paul mean
when he said:
1 Cor 7:15
15 But if the
unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage
in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. (KJV)
Doesn't the phrase
"not under bondage" mean that the believing spouse is no longer under
bondage to the marriage covenant because it has been invalidated and made
non-existent by the unbelieving spouse when the unbelieving spouse got a
divorce without just, biblical cause?
Assessing The Inspiration Of Words
Using principles you have advocated, of putting all scriptures on a given matter together and taking them all into consideration, I arrive at the following.
Any word purporting to be from the Almighty must be assessed in light of other clear words emanating from the Almighty. Any word from a servant of the Almighty must likewise be assessed by other clear words emanating from the Almighty in order to ascertain its inspiration. If the servant's word is in harmony with the clear word from the Almighty, then it could have been inspired by the Almighty. But if the servant's word conflicts with the clear word from the Almighty, then it is indeed evident that the particular word that the servant spoke was not inspired by the Almighty. This principle is derived from Isaiah 8:20.
Therefore, if 1 Corinthians 7:15 is taken as scripture, which it is not, for Paul said that he was giving his own opinion and not the Almighty's word, it must indeed be interpreted in light of the Almighty's clear words. We have the Almighty's clear words that were spoken by the Messiah in Matthew 5 and 19. 1 Corinthians 7:15 must therefore be interpreted in light of the Messiah's words, and not the other way round. For the Messiah is superior to all of his servants, especially when his servants are simply giving their own opinions devoid of any command emanating from the Messiah.
Also, the Messiah said in Matthew 4:4,
"It is written,
'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the
mouth of Yahweh.'"
It is therefore the word that emanates from the Almighty that we must live by. Not necessarily the word that emanates from human beings. And seeing that 1 Corinthians 7:12-15 emanated from a human being, and not from the Almighty, it cannot be said to be binding upon human beings in the context of justifying a believer lawfully married to an unbeliever deeming his or her marriage dissolved on the unjust departure of the unbeliever, thereby allowing such a believer to marry again.
Reader And Author In Fundamental Disagreement
From our exchange of views it seems to me that at the present point in time we are fundamentally disagreed, with none persuading the other. Maybe in time, if either of us changes our views, we will come to some agreement.
Shalom
ISAAC
[Previous Section] [Contents] [Next Section]
Return to Servants of Yahweh Site Contents page.
© 1999-2000, Isaac Aluochier, All rights reserved. Published by Servants of
Yahweh,