Reader Modifies Some Of His Views
Hi Isaac,
I agree that it seems
that we will have to agree to disagree agreeably. :-) How did you like that
tongue-twister? :-)
But, I would like to say
that your two letters, especially this one below, have caused me to refine or
modify some of my statements and opinions. And for that, I sincerely thank you
very much for our very frank exchange of opinions!!!! I sincerely owe you a
great debt of gratitude of immense proportions; and I really, truly mean what I
am saying!!!! Because of you, I discovered and corrected some errors in some of
my opinions before very many people have had a chance to read them. My edited
version of our first major letter exchange --- reflecting some of my changed
opinions in responses listed below in this letter --- may be read at my web
site at the following address if you are interested:
http://www.frankcaw.com/letters2.html
My responses to your
objections in this letter are listed below as appropriate.
Very best wishes in
Christ,
Frank
Reader's View On Becoming A New Creature In The
Messiah
AUTHOR:
Hi Frank
A few more clarifying
comments and questions?
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.
AUTHOR:
Is it the case that
accepting the Messiah as one's Master and Saviour alters one's marital status?
READER:
No. But, at whatever
point in time a person accepts Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour, they
become a new creature in Christ with a clean moral slate (since they have been
forgiven). Then, at that point in time, they should begin conducting their
lives according to God's commandments. The problem, however, is that often they
start their new life in Christ with "baggage from the past," which is
why Paul said that we should put our past behind us and look towards the future
in Christ Jesus. That is why new Christians (or even former Christians who
sinned and then later sincerely repented of their sins and re-dedicated their
lives to God) may have committed terrible sins, including adultery, during
their "old" life in sin, but since they are getting a "fresh"
start in Christ Jesus, they make restitution wherever possible and practical,
and then go forward with their life determined to do their very best with the
help and guidance of the Holy Spirit to sin no more. And they start their new
life in Christ in whatever marital state they happen to be in at the time of
their conversion to Christ, and conduct their affairs accordingly.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
Not so; please reference
my previous answer above.
AUTHOR:
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!
READER:
In view of my first
answer above, this is all hypothetical nonsense that has no validity or
relationship to reality.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
I never said anything so
ridiculous. Of course new believers don't have to re-marry their spouse just
because they accepted Christ as their Lord and Saviour. I was talking about
people guilty of adultery or an unjustified divorce action during their life in
"sin" being free in Christ now to start their life with a clean moral
slate; that means if they are single due to an unjustifiable divorce, they are
still free to re-marry since they have been forgiven and should start their
life anew in whatever state they find themselves in at the time of their
conversion.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
When one becomes a
believer in Christ, then, of course, one should then conform every aspect of
their life to God's Holy Word. Therefore, if she had been living with a man to
whom she was not married, then after her conversion to Christ, she would have
to quit committing adultery with him.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
Not so. She begins her
new life in Christ with a fresh start, determined to conform her life according
to the moral teachings of the Bible from that point onward. In this
hypothetical example, she would immediately cease living in adultery by no
longer living with a man to whom she was not married. But, since she is now
single in God's eyes, she would be free to re-marry.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
Not true, because, in
this hypothetical example, she would have no lawful husband. Let's not forget
that this hypothetical woman was divorced during her life in sin, and that now,
because of her conversion to Christ, all of her past failures and
transgressions are in her "forgiven and forgotten" past. Therefore,
when she became a new creature in Christ, she started with a clean moral slate,
including the fact that she is single as far as her marital status is
concerned.
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.
AUTHOR:
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?
READER:
That's precisely my
point. You start your new life in Christ in whatever you may be in at the time
you are converted, and then you conduct all of your future affairs accordingly.
AUTHOR:
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?
READER:
In other words, God
didn't really forgive her because He is still going to exact punishment for her
past misdeeds??? But, if you say God didn't really forgive her, then God is a
liar because in His Word, He states repeatedly that He is always ready to
forgive us when we become a new creature in Christ.
Reader's View On Forgiveness Differs From That Of
The Author
AUTHOR:
In this case, not
being allowed to marry again?
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.
READER:
Then she is not really
forgiven. (See my divorce article for a short segment on forgiveness. [http://www.frankcaw.com/divorce.html])
AUTHOR:
She is not allowed to
marry again until such time as her lawful husband who divorced her dies. She
must therefore live the life of a righteous single woman.
READER:
No, she must, rather,
live the life of a righteous woman, free to re-marry if she wishes.
Does A Lawful Marriage Contract Cease To Exist
Simply Because A Party To The Contract Breaks It?
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?
AUTHOR:
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's 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.
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.
READER:
A contract is null and
void if either party terminates it. There may be penalties involved for the
offending party, but nevertheless, it is terminated, and therefore
non-existent.
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!!
AUTHOR:
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.
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.
READER:
Not true. If the
marriage contract becomes non-existent due to the sinful divorce action by the
husband, then the wife is free and single regardless of whether or not you
think she shouldn't be. You have to admit the reality of reality. Of course,
God doesn't approve of unjust divorces, but He has given mankind free will in
such matters to choose good or evil. And if the husband chooses evil in this
case, then the woman is single whether you admit it or not. And God certainly
doesn't punish victims of someone else's evil actions.
Is It Cruelty And Evil To Forbid An Unjustly
Divorced Woman From Marrying Again?
AUTHOR:
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.
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.
READER:
In other words, you
think God is going to very cruelly punish the victim of someone else's evil
actions by condemning them to a lifetime of loneliness?? How cruel and
heartless and loveless, and yes, evil.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
In other words, you
think God is going to very cruelly punish the victim of someone else's evil
actions by condemning them to a lifetime of loneliness??
How cruel and heartless
and loveless, and yes, evil.
Is Matthew 19:11-12 Irrelevant To The Subject Of
Divorce And Marrying Again?
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
Jesus was talking about
those who voluntarily wish to be eunuchs, or were born that way, or cruelly
made that way by evil men. That has nothing to do with what we are talking
about.
Can An Unjustly Divorced Woman Be Equated To A
Eunuch?
AUTHOR:
For the Almighty
gives them this gift of being able to live righteous single lives before him.
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.
READER:
I don't think so. There
are no permanent physical losses caused by the divorcing husband; the woman is
quite capable of living a normal, happy life. You really have a very cruel and
callous attitude towards women. I think --- based on all that you have said in
our correspondences --- that you keep mixing ancient Old Testament Law and
traditions with the new and better New Testament Law. As the apostle Paul said
to those in his days that were trying to mix the two covenants together, you're
really much better off living under the New Testament of Grace than futilely
trying to be perfect and sinless living under the Old Covenant.
Is The Life Of A Single Person Necessarily A
Miserable One?
AUTHOR:
Also, it does not
appear to be the case that the life of a single person is necessarily a
miserable, lonely and frustrating one.
READER:
From those words you
just uttered, I can tell immediately that you have never experienced or enjoyed
the incredible beauty and love and intimacy and caring and sharing of a
"soulmate" marriage between two souls united together as one before
God! I shared such a relationship with my late wife for over 26 years, and
believe me, after living such a beautiful life with her, these last 16 months
have vividly demonstrated to me just how lonely and incomplete a single
person's life is. That is why God said that Adam needed an Eve.
AUTHOR:
Was not the Messiah
single? Was he miserable, lonely and frustrated?
READER:
He was God, with a
special, unique ministry mission. And He left earth at the age of 33 or 34.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
Paul voluntarily chose
to be single; that was his choice. It is an entirely different matter to force
unwilling victims into a lifetime of singleness against their will when they
have done nothing wrong.
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.
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
Yes, but you're trying
to say that God wants to further punish her with a lifestyle He did not intend
for people to have just because her former husband sinned.
Is Matthew 5:10-12 Irrelevant To An Unjustly
Divorced Woman?
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
We're talking here in
this passage about people being persecuted for their faith and belief in
Christ. You, instead, are trying to force cruel lifestyles onto people because
of someone else's sin --- an entirely different matter.
Is It The Case That The Almighty Never Allows
Unjustly Divorced Women To Suffer?
AUTHOR:
A woman unjustly
divorced surely suffers in this world with the Almighty's permission.
READER:
Not so, because God is
not trying to force such things as you believe.
Reader Does Not Accept The Author's Words Based On
Matthew 5:10-12
AUTHOR:
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.
What is more
important: unlawful marriage in this life, or securing the promise of the
kingdom of the Almighty?
READER:
You're offering a false
set of choices.
AUTHOR:
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.'
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.
Are Christian Husbands The Masters Of Their Own
Households Or Not?
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!!
AUTHOR:
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.) 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.
READER:
Your very big problem is
that you are trying to make your unbiblical principle of dominance and
callousness over woman as the ultimate, autonomous principle in life that takes
absolute precedence over every other moral commandment in the Bible. Believe
me, God meant it when He said that He judges men and women the exact same way in
moral issues. Christian husbands may be the spiritual leaders of their wives
and family, but they are not masters who lord it over their second-class wives
whose status is almost akin to that of slaves or property. I really am
disturbed that you really seem to believe that women can be punished for the
sins of their husbands.
Has The Author Portrayed Women As Second-Class
People?
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)
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
Yes, and salvation
includes the realm of morality and judgment!
Furthermore, the
biblical concept of husbands being the head of their families involves a
command structure of sorts, but it is not the domineering type you seem to
envision. Women are not second-class people; they are equal to men in matters
of morality and judgment.
AUTHOR:
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.
Reader Reiterates That Unjust Divorces Are Valid In
The Almighty's Eyes
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.
AUTHOR:
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?
READER:
Look, you really have a
problem acknowledging reality. Now I would agree with you that a man should not
divorce his wife without just, biblical cause, but if he disobeys God by doing
so, then the woman is single whether you think she is or not. Now, I would
agree with you that God would believe that they shouldn't have gotten divorced,
but the reality is that the husband exercised his God-given gift of freewill by
getting an unjust divorce. So, why punish the woman for the sins of the sinning
husband? Don't you think that is just a little bit unfair? (When Jesus told the
woman at the well in
What Is The Huge Difference Between Forgiveness And
Reconciliation?
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
AUTHOR:
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!
READER:
There is a huge
difference between "forgiveness" and "reconciliation."
We should forgive, but
that doesn't mean a Christian has to reconcile back into a marriage they don't
want for any number of reasons.
Are All Of Paul's Words In Complete Harmony With The
Scriptures?
AUTHOR:
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.
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.
READER:
I find Paul's words in
complete harmony with the rest of the Bible. You also are forgetting that Paul
was speaking under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit even though
in that instance he was not expressing a direct commandment from God Himself. A
correct interpretation of Matthew eliminates any perceived disharmony with
Paul's epistle.
Reader Clarifies His Understanding On The Difference
Between Forgiveness And Reconciliation
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.
Reader Alleges That An Unjust Divorce Is Not Sin,
Provided One Does Not Marry Again
AUTHOR:
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?
READER:
Yes. It is not a sin to
divorce someone unless you re-marry or otherwise have sex with someone. The
scriptures teach that adultery is committed only if you re-marry or engage in
sex.
Reader Rejects The Author's Rendition Of The
Messiah's Words
AUTHOR:
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,
READER:
The Messiah never said
what you are saying.
AUTHOR:
'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.'
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?
AUTHOR:
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?
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?
READER:
Already answered.
You are forgetting that
Paul was speaking under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit even
though in that instance he was not expressing a direct commandment from God
Himself. A correct interpretation of Matthew eliminates any perceived
disharmony with Paul's epistle.
Reader Disputes The Factual Basis Of The Author's
Reasoning
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.
AUTHOR:
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!
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?
AUTHOR:
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.
READER:
I agree, except that the
Messiah didn't say in Matthew what you are saying that He said. Also, you are
forgetting that Paul was speaking under the inspiration and guidance of the
Holy Spirit even though in that instance he was not expressing a direct commandment
from God Himself. A correct interpretation of Matthew eliminates any perceived
disharmony with Paul's epistle.
AUTHOR:
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.
MY CLOSING COMMENTS:
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, Isaac Aluochier, All rights reserved. Published by Servants of
Yahweh,