“Put Away” Does Not Mean Divorce – Does A Divorce Certificate Dissolves A Marriage? Part 2

APOLUO (separation without dissolution of marriage and no writ of divorcement). APOSTASION (dissolution of marriage with a writ of divorcement)

See our newest Facebook discussion...

Refuting the Put Away Vs. Divorce Error

If one of the divorced spouses remarries is the remaining spouse free to remarry?

No, the remaining spouse is not free to remarry. Check out Mt. 19:9 (b). Jesus clearly tells his audience with the example He gives that the wife who is forsaken and replaced by another woman is NOT free to marry. He says any man who takes her as wife commits adultery. Jesus shows us that all that is really going on here is not “marriage” as created by Him, but husband/wife swapping—-adultery, pure and simple. Many teach today that the “innocent”/forsaken, etc is free to marry, but there is nowhere in scripture which says any such thing. To the contrary, we find that a remarriage does not dissolve the previous covenant (Herod/Herodias, Rom. 7:2-3, Mal. 2:10-17). It only causes the one who remarries to become an adulterer/adulteress until they forsake that sinful relationship. Nowhere in scripture can we find where God gives a “choice” to the innocent one— to either STAND for the restoration of their marriage (by praying their adulterous spouse would repent and forsake their adultery) OR decide to give up on them and find someone different. Jesus and Paul both taught that the “innocent” was to remain unmarried. Jesus said though that many would not choose (yes, CHOOSE) to follow Him in this.

I have to disagree. “Romans 7:2-3 For example, by law a married woman is joined to her husband as long as he is living. But suppose her husband dies. Then the marriage law no longer applies to her. 3 But suppose that married woman gets married again while her husband is still alive. Then she is called a woman who commits adultery. But suppose her husband dies. Then she is free from that law. She is not guilty of adultery even if she marries another man. This passage DOES NOT address a married spouse who has obtained a LEGAL divorce. A legal divorce is based on the scripture that you also provided”

The comparison in that passage is not whether she is divorced or not, it is whether her original husband is DEAD or not. If she marries ANY MAN, irregardless of her circumstances, while her covenant husband is still alive, Paul said she shall be called an adulteress. However, once her husband dies, if she then marries another, she will NOT be called an adulteress……….because she is free—-not by divorce decree, but by the death of her husband. Paul used the absolute PERFECT analogy…………..one way to escape the penalty of the law—-Through Christ…………..one way to to be free from the marriage covenant—-DEATH. There are not multiple ways to be free from the penalty of the law—only one (Jesus). There are not multiple ways to be free from a covenant marriage—only one (death). Perfect analogy and very well understood by Paul’s audience. Paul used the same exact language when addressing the Corinthian church in I Cor. 7:39. Notice in neither did Paul say that the DIVORCE law freed, giving a woman the right to marry again. Jesus was very clear that if a woman marries AFTER a divorce (Mt. 5:32, 19:9, Mk. 10:12) SHE is guilty of adultery. A divorce does not dissolve ONE FLESH into two again………..only death has that capability………..and only GOD can separate what HE has joined together. Man does not have that power. We can only separate locale wise.

Matthew 19:9 Here is what I tell you. Anyone who divorces his wife and gets married to another woman commits adultery. A man may divorce his wife only if she has not been faithful to him.” If this man is allowed to divorce his wife because “she has been unfaithful” then that renders him NO LONGER MARRIED. The covenant is broken and he is no longer “joined to his wife” as stipulated in the verse you provided (Romans 7:2-3 ). Romans 7:2-3 applies to someone who is STILL MARRIED or “joined to their spouse”.

I don’t know what translation that is, but it does not support your view that divorce dissolves a union God has joined together. It only appears to permit separation. The early church taught this, but NO remarriage. They almost universally taught that even in the case of an unrepentant spouse, one could only separate room and board, but they were not free to marry another. If they did, they too would be guilty of adultery. The thing is, if one renders this passage to mean the “innocent” is free to remarry, they have to explain away all the other passages throughout scripture(including Rom. 7:2-3, I Cor. 7:39, I Cor. 7:10-12) that show adultery, remarriage, etc does NOT dissolve the original marriage bond.

If a couple is separated for reasons other than adultery and one remarries then the one who remarries has committed adultery and the remaining spouse is NO LONGER MARRIED. There is NOTHING in scripture that prohibits the remaining spouse from remarriage. The adulterers “marriage” is in question and invalid however.

Where in scripture can you find that the “innocent” is no longer joined to the covenant spouse, but the covenant spouse’s new “marriage” is invalid? If the “innocent” is free, so is the guilty. There either IS a marital bond or there is not………..The simple fact concerning Herod/Herodias is that their marriage was NOT lawful/legal. They were not “married”, they were committing adultery. Herodias’ adultery did not dissolve her marriage to Philip……….it was still intact according to John……….she STILL belonged to Philip, though she divorced Philip and married Herod. I would be very interested if you can find something in scripture to verify your stance because I have looked and looked hoping to find evidence that what is being practiced today, in the church and out, is AOK with God and that remarriage is NOT adultery. I could not find any such evidence. You say the remaining spouse can remarry, but Jesus says otherwise. He says in Mt. 19:9 (check out other translations)…………..whosoever marries her that is divorced (the forsaken wife whose husband has remarried) commits adultery. It sure doesn’t appear that Jesus in any way, shape or form gives the OK for an abandoned wife to remarry. Paul relates back to us that the wife who is separated from her husband is NOT permitted to remarry, but must remain unmarried OR be reconciled to her husband (when he repents of course).

Actually this is true when a couple is legally divorced on the grounds of adultery as well. I could find nothing that prohibits remarriage. However I am inclined to believe, although I am uncertain, but it seems to me that the adulterous spouse is NOT free to remarry as long as the faithful spouse either declines to divorce them or remains single. (ex: Todd Bentley’s wife is under no scriptural obligation to remain unmarried simply because her husband chose to marry someone else.) There is nothing that allows the adulterer to hold the faithful spouse HOSTAGE restraining them from any future happiness and fulfillment.

It is not the unfaithful spouse who is holding the other hostage, it is God’s command………….each one of us is held responsible for upholding OUR VOWS. What our spouse chooses to do with what they vowed is between them and God. Here I will quote Matthew 19:9 and insert Todd and Shoanna’s name in it: “and I say to you, if Todd divorces his wife Shoanna, except for fornication, and marries Jessa, commits adultery; and whosoever marries Shoanna commits adultery.”………..Does it appear that in God’s sight that Shoanna is free to marry another man? It does not appear to me to be the case……………They ALL will be in adultery then.

Why would this scripture not apply to the remaining, now single, spouse in the same manner as it applies to a widow or widower? 1Cr 7:9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

Because God does not give our weak flesh permission to sin. If He states it is adultery to join with another prior to the death of one’s covenant spouse, it is adultery. We each have our individual burdens to carry in this life. If one has a spouse that is incapacitated, and they “burn”, what should such a one do—have an affair? Would God permit this with His blessings? I do not think so. He would expect faithfulness to the vows the healthy one made. In the same way, a follower of Christ should have HIS heart towards the wayward spouse—if they really are “in Him”…………….what does Jesus desire in the wayward? His desire is for them to forsake their adulterous behavior and return to the one/family that He joined them to. So should be our hearts……….for we live not for ourselves any longer, but we are to live for Him……….and He THROUGH us.

Yes God hates covenant breaking. God divorced his wife Israel on the grounds of adultery. He had the option and he chose to take her back because he loved her so much. But He did not have to take her back. God is good like that!

Did God call her his wife AFTER the divorce? Let’s go to Malachi 2…………who does God call the man’s “covenant” wife…………the first or the second? When God says He hates divorce is it in regards to ALL marriages contracted or only covenant marriages/marriages approved/joined by God—-see Ezra 9-10 also…….. Throughout scripture, which wife was given preference by God over the others? There is much in God’s Word on this issue. What is happening in the church today just cannot be supported by God’s Word.

You can’t have it both ways. The very LAW that YOU refer to allows for divorce for adultery. It’s as if you want to ignore that the LAW dissolves marriage under certain and very specific circumstances. Well it does.

I do not believe Jesus EVER gives permission for a believer to seek a CIVIL divorce from their spouse (go to the law in order to obtain a divorce). What I DO believe that scripture permits is a BODILY separation from the dwelling place of one’s spouse……….due to unrepentant, ongoing sin. Obtaining a CIVIL divorce (which states that the marriage has been dissolved), does NOT dissolve what God has joined together. That is exactly why Jesus said that if one does divorce, they will be committing adultery should they marry again……….how could that be “IF” a divorce did have the power to dissolve what God has joined together as many seem to believe today? The only answer is that a divorce does NOT have the power to dissolve what God joined together……..and Jesus wanted people to understand that and the condition they would be in should they seek to continue practicing divorce/remarriage as they had been.

You aptly said, “There are not multiple ways to be free from a covenant marriage—only one (death)” But you contradict yourself, the LAW that YOU refer to says there are two ways, Death AND ADULTERY. If a divorce does not “dissolve ONE FLESH” then what is the point of allowing DIVORCE at all?

The so called “law” of divorce was given by a man to men due to hardheartedness. One thing you will not find in scripture anywhere though is that a divorce DISSOLVES what God has joined together. Just as one form of adultery was permitted in OT times (polygamy), so was another (divorce/remarriage)…………..and both were permitted due to man’s hardheartedness and unwillingness to honor marriage as created by God—one man/one woman for life. Jesus was pretty clear that marriage NOW is back on track with the creation intent and all else would be sin………..no more polygamy, more more remarriages while one had a living spouse. 1+1=1

Perhaps a definition of the term DIVORCE is needed here. Divorce :1 : the action or an instance of legally dissolving a marriage If a marriage is “dissolved” then the parties are no longer married.

Yes, that is man’s definition of divorce. However, that is not what Jesus taught in gospels, is it? Jesus taught us that civil divorce does NOT dissolve a marriage, freeing BOTH parties. Jesus taught that AFTER a divorce, BOTH parties would be guilty of divorce should they join with others. That should tell us what divorce does and what it does not do, shouldn’t it………..or should we go by what “man” tells us is right?

As for the married woman who has a LIVING HUSBAND… Notice what it says “suppose that married woman gets married again while her husband is still alive” Again the scripture clearly and WITH EMPHASIS refers to a MARRIED WOMAN. A legally divorced woman IS NOT a “married woman”.

You seem to be stuck on a “legally divorced” woman. Herodias was a “legally divorced” woman………….and John told Herod that she did not belong to Him………..even after she married him………….she still belonged to her first husband, Philip. Seems to line up perfectly with what Paul taught in Rom. 7:2-3.

If she is legally divorced then he is NO LONGER HER COVENANT HUSBAND. There is absolutley NOTHING there (other than wishful thinking perhaps) that says that a legally divorced person is not free to marry. One is either divorced or they are single. A divorced person IS NOT required to live their lives as though he or she is still married.

Again, please find me ANY instances of a “legally divorced woman” NOT being an adulteress if she remarries. I can find plenty of scriptures which show she IS an adulteress, but can you find one in which she is not………..after Jesus taught HIS commands on the use of marriage?

What then would be the point of allowing divorce under any circumstances in the first place??????

Jesus was very clear on why MOSES TOLERATED divorce/remarriage—–man’s hardheartedness. Do you honestly believe that Jesus taught this TOLERATION was to be continued?

Notice in neither did Paul say that the DIVORCE law freed, giving a woman the right to marry again. Notice in neither did Paul say that the DIVORCE law PROHIBITS a womans the right to marry again. Why do you read that into it?

Paul was not speaking about the “laws” given due to hardheartedness of man. Paul was speaking to the creation laws of marriage—–one man/one woman, for LIFE. Paul was teaching no different than what Jesus taught.

One is either divorced or they are single. A LEGALLY divorced person IS NOT required to live their lives as though he or she is still married. One is either divorced or they are single. A LEGALLY divorced person IS NOT required to live their lives as though he or she is still married. One is either divorced or they are single. A LEGALLY divorced person IS NOT required to live their lives as though he or she is still married.

showlove, you seem to place much emphasis on “legally divorced” when Jesus places NO emphasis on man’s laws concerning divorce. This is what Paul taught and he made it clear that this was a COMMAND by Jesus(and where did Jesus teach on marriage/divorce—in the Gospels) “and if a woman does depart she is to remain UNMARRIED OR be reconciled to her husband………and the husband is NOT to divorce his wife”. I Cor. 7:10-12 Those are COMMANDS for the UNMARRIED(divorced or separated) to remain unmarried. They are NOT free to join with others…………why? Because though UNMARRIED they are still bound to their spouse for life and there is only two alternatives—–remain unmarried because your spouse is unrepentant OR reconcile with your repentant spouse and restore what God has joined together.

Divorce and separation ARE NOT the same things

They are to Jesus because neither of those things dissolve what He joined together.

I have to ask again, so that the question is not lost in all of the rhetoric. Why would God, why would Jesus, why would Paul clearly put forth grounds for divorce if one is expected to continue living life as though they were still married? What, oh do tell, would be the point?

God doesn’t put forth grounds…………Jesus doesn’t put forth grounds…………and neither does Paul. Jesus said MAN gave grounds for HARDHEARTEDNESS. Jesus never gave any concession. Matter of fact, Jesus says who marries the “innocent” wife(Mt. 19:9) commits adultery……….so it is clear that He does not condone marriages of the “innocent” party as many want to believe. Paul NEVER anywhere in all his teachings on marriage gives permission for a deserted one, a departed one, etc to find another spouse. Paul, at the end of his teachings on marriage, tells us that marriage is for life………and only when one’s spouse dies are we then granted the right to marry again—in the Lord(those who are free to marry). All throughout scripture (and I have given many examples already) we will not find where adultery dissolves the covenant of marriage, where divorce dissolves the covenant of marriage, or where a NEW covenant of marriage supersedes the first covenant. Again and again, we find where God honors the first covenant(the one HE joined) only and speaks against any other covenants made while ones original spouse remains alive.

p.s. I do not refer to the unbiblical and sorry state of divorce and remarriage that we see in the body of Christ in general and the clergy in particular today. One other thing, can anyone provide SPECIFIC scripture that CLEARLY prohibits LEGALLY divorced persons from remarriage?

I have given many scriptures(Matthew. 5:32, 19:9, Mark 10:3-12, Luke 16:16-18, Romans 7:2-3, I Corinthians 7:39, I Cor. 7:10-12) which shows divorced persons are NOT free to be married to others—-according to God Himself………and this applies to the “innocent” party as well as the “guilty” party. I believe also, that those who teach that once your spouse remarries, then they are FREE themselves, do not have ANY biblical support to make such a claim. Scripture teaches that their spouse is now in adultery. Nowhere does scripture teach that a new vow/covenant nullifies the previous covenant in God’s eyes—to the contrary. I know it doesn’t seem fair that a spurned spouse has to remain ‘unmarried’, but that is exactly what Paul and Jesus taught.

Oh no you don’t! We HAVE NOT been discussing “civil divorce” and you know it. Don’t try to change your tune now. While YOU may “believe” that the term DIVORCE means a bodily separation from a dwelling place you have given absolutely no evidence to support it. You need to research the meaning of the term DIVORCE both now and then. Divorce means Divorce Separation means Separation They are not the same thing. Anything else is wishful thinking on your part..

showlove, YOU define what you mean by “legal” divorce then. It seems to me that you think adultery gives right for a “legal” divorce, yet I have shown SCRIPTURAL examples where adultery (either extramaritally or by a remarriage) does NOT dissolve what God joined together. Can you show ONE scripture where this is the case?

Mt. 5:32, Mt. 19:9, Mk. 10:10-12, Lk. 16:16-18, Rom. 7:2-3, I Cor. 7:10-11 (UNMARRIED woman)…………did you even look at all the scriptures I posted? There is PLENTY of scriptural evidence that “LEGALLY” divorced persons commit adultery if they marry others.

You are either being disingenuous or …. My bible AND YOURS reads in red letters: Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, EXCEPT IT BE FOR FORNICATION, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Did you read Matthew 1:18-24? Do you understand the betrothal custom of the Jews in Jesus’ day? In the above passage, if a man put away such a “wife”(betrothed) because of FORNICATION(check out the Greek, porneia) prior to the marriage bed—THIS Jesus permitted, because they had never come together as man and wife. If they had come together as man and wife, and the man put away his wife, HE WOULD COMMIT adultery if he married another woman………..and she would as well should any man marry her (the second part of this verse). You are saying the abandoned wife/husband CAN remarry without sin. Jesus says the opposite of what you are saying. Are you saying that Jesus DOES permit the abandoned spouse to remarry? If so, what scripture would you supply to uplift your belief as being in line with God’s Word?

Clearly Jesus leaves grounds for legal divorce. What Jesus did was LIMIT the grounds for divorce, he DID NOT ban divorce altogether. If a man “putteth away” (separation) WITHOUT providing her a writ of divorcement then the woman AND THE MAN are still married and they committ adultery should they join with anyone else.

Yes, Jesus gives that right for a BETROTHED couple (betrothal was LEGALLY BINDING)……….mt. 1:18-24. However, the Early church did not see the betrothal view, they taught (universally) that one can separate bed and board if the other spouse was in unrepentant sin…………but they were NOT freed from the marriage bond—-which completely agrees with all other teachings of Jesus on the marriage bond as well as what Paul taught. The proper way to interpret scripture is to allow the clear to interpret the “unclear”, not the other way around as you seem to be doing.

“Divorce” and “Put or send away” are not the same thing. A man who wanted to divorce his wife had to do two things. He had to write her a bill of divorcement and then send her away or put her away, Deuteronomy 24:1-4, Mark 10:4. A man who found that his wife had been unfaithful to him did not write her a bill of divorcement as she and the other man were stoned. Malachi and Matthew chapter five were all about men who were putting or sending away their wives without just cause. Men were putting away their wives without writing a bill of divorcement even though their wives were not guilty of adultery. God hates the putting away because it always involves sin. In one case the sin of the wife for being unfaithful and in the other the sin of the husband for putting his wife away with out just cause or a bill of divorcement. The act of putting away a wife without a bill of divorcement is equivalent to separation. The man and woman are still married if she was not guilty of adultery.

You are mixing two things together………the REASON for divorce and the papers themselves. Men WERE giving their INNOCENT wives writs of divorcement too. Jesus was saying the paper meant NOTHING to HIM. Just because men got a piece of paper did not mean their union was dissolved in His sight. It was not. The truth is this: Jesus taught that men and women still are married IRREGARDLESS if one of them commits adultery (Rom. 7:2-3………..and the second part of Mt. 19:9). Jesus and Paul both teach that DEATH severs that bond. The guilty adulterer can’t go and sever the bond with their spouse at will (extra-maritally or by remarriage) and the innocent can’t sever that bond when they remarry AFTER their spouse does (Mt. 19:9

Many times the word “divorce” has been translated in the scripture when the word should be “put away”. In order to get all the verses I did searches in both the King James, New King James, Septuagint and LITV. Normally I don’t go to so many different versions, but thought it might be helpful since many use more than one version. You might want to compare with your translation as you go through these verses. The important thing is to use the correct word found in the Hebrew and Greek texts.

I have studied all the applicable verses in over 18 different translations and the Greek/Hebrew due to my desire to know the full truth on this matter (and my family is racked with MANY divorces/remarriages, so this is a very personal thing for me to understand).

In the following verses the Pharisees test or try to trick the Christ in a matter of Law. Notice how they begin by talking about putting away a wife and then switch to divorce. (Mat 19:3 NKJV) “The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to put away (apoluo G630)[divorce] his wife for just any reason?”” 4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” Notice that the Christ correctly answered their question based on the Law.

You are adding the next verses into the above. Jesus is not speaking about divorce law here. He is addressing the creation law of marriage—one man/one woman for LIFE. Notice He very clearly tells them that once God joins two as One, they are NO LONGER TWO. God never gave provision to put away a wife OR a husband. That was man’s (Moses’) doing………why? Because of man’s hardheartedness.

A put away wife without a bill of divorcement was merely separated from her husband. They were still married. Now the Pharisees change the subject to divorce. In verse 8 he answers their question. In verse 9 he teaches more about the “putting away”. (Mat 19:7 NKJV) They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce (apostasion G647), and to put her away (apoluo G630)?” (Mat 19:8 NKJV) He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to put away (apoluo G630)[divorce] your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. (Mat 19:9 NKJV) And I say to you, whoever puts away (apoluo G630)[divorces] his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is put away (apoluo G630)[divorced] commits adultery.”

I’m not understanding your point here. Jesus NEVER addresses the METHOD of putting away (whether it should be done with legal paperwork). Jesus is addressing sending a wife away—-period………..and if that is done, and a man takes another woman, he is now committing adultery. If a man takes the put away wife, he too will be committing adultery. How is that? Because a divorce does not dissolve the ONE back into TWO. THEY are still ONE in the eyes of God.

As you can see in Matthew 19:8 Christ said that from the beginning it was not so. What was not so? Divorce for any reason was not from the beginning because the Law says that a man must find some uncleanness in her, Deuteronomy 24:1. It is permitted to divorce a woman in whom is found an uncleanness. Adultery is a Lawful reason for putting away without a writ of divorce. However since Yahweh wrote a bill of divorcement to the house of Israel even though she was guilty we should follow His example.

Divorce for ANY reason was not given to man by God (not even for “uncleanness”). If a woman was found in adultery………or found NOT to be a virgin, she was STONED. THAT was the command given by God. God never gives approval for divorce after marriage (the consummation of the marriage bed). Moses gave that provision and Jesus made it clear that it was due to man’s hardheartedness……….not because of a woman’s “uncleanness”, which if it were adultery/fornication prior to marriage, was a stoneable offense……..so divorcing in such cases instead of stoning would NOT have been hardhearted (as is the case with Joseph)……..think about that. Also, stoning was done away with by Jesus………….so putting away for that reason is not the alternative to stoning. The alternative to stoning is FORGIVENESS and RESTORATION……….the example given us by Jesus. If we are to say that it is our “choice” to stay in such a marriage or NOT, what does that say about the heart of the one who refuses to forgive and/or pray for their spouse to repent, vs the one who remains faithful to THEIR vows before the Lord and does not desire to see their family fragmented and intermingled with other’s families? I do not believe God is a God of confusion, do you? Do you honestly think He has different standards for His people based upon what THEY desire to do in their individual circumstances? Just some things to think about………… Blessings……….

You say – “If it is adultery for a saved man/woman to remarry, it is also adultery for an unsaved man/woman to remarry. ” Yet you have offered not one single shread of evidence that supports your assertion that LEGALLY divorced individuals can never remarry. Your bible and mine clearly states in RED letters that Jesus allowed divorce on the grounds of adultery/ fornication. There is absolutely NOTHING that states that those involved cannot remarry.

showlove, I HAVE posted scripture upon scripture and even biblical marriage examples. I’ve yet to see any scripture from you to support that one CAN remarry while their spouse (the covenant one) remains alive, without it being adultery in the Lord’s sight. Yes, it appears that Jesus permits divorce…………but what kind of divorce? You did not address betrothal divorce (Mt. 1:18-24)……….that was a practice back then—–divorce being something that one had to obtain to get out of the next step—-leaving the father’s/mother’s house and consummation.

The simple truth is that if one wrongly put away the wife(because she didn’t FORNICATE), anyone who married the wife would commit adultery—EVEN IF THE HUSBAND REMARRIED. This is what Jesus taught. In that very passage that you say gives permission for the “innocent” one to divorce/remarry—for adultery, Jesus says the innocent wife is NOT free(even though Jesus gives us the example of her husband committing adultery through remarriage)—hence it would be adultery for a different man to marry her after she is divorced. So either Jesus is confused on His “innocent” party clause, or we are misinterpreting the first part of that passage. I think most likely it is man who is misinterpreting the first part. We cannot honestly deny that in both other gospels (given to Gentile audiences), Jesus gives NO allowance to divorce/remarry. Paul, never mentions divorce in Rom. 7:2-3 as something that will sever the marital bond (then his analogy would not be perfect, would it?), nor does he ever mention that when a woman “departs” and is considered ‘UNMARRIED” in I Cor. 7:10-11, that she is free to be married to another man. On the contrary, Paul tells us that the LORD commands (not suggests) that the woman MUST remain unmarried……………or be reconciled to her husband………no door #3.

showlove, no matter how many times you say, “it is just not there in the scriptures”, you TRUTHFULLY cannot deny that the scriptures do teach remarriage after a divorce IS adultery—-for the innocent as well as the guilty. Herodias’ adultery(divorce/remarriage) did not dissolve her marriage to Philip. John lost his head for saying that. The priest’s adultery (2nd marriage) in Malachi 2 did not dissolve his marriage to his covenant wife (the wife of his youth)—nor did his tearful display at the altar of God dissolve his covenant marriage and legitimize his unlawful union. Michal’s adultery (second marriage) did not dissolve her covenant marriage with David. Gomer’s adulteries did not dissolve her marriage to Hosea. The woman’s adultery (remarriage) in Rom. 7:2-3 did not dissolve her marriage to her covenant husband. A woman who “departs” and is considered “unmarried” in I Cor. 7:10-11 is not free from the bond of marriage regarding her covenant husband. How many more examples do you need shown you to prove that divorce/adultery/remarriage does not dissolve the original covenant in the sight of God??

LOL!!!!!! So now you have rephrased your argument. Can’t say that I blamed you. Now that you (apparently) agree that since a spouse that is only “put away” (separated) is not actually divorced and therefore cannot legally remarry, tell us, can a LEGALLY divorced spouse remarry? LOL (giggle)

Mocking will not change God’s Word. I notice you will not touch the betrothal issue. Why? The truth is scripture does not teach divorce dissolves the ONE FLESH. Do I believe in divorce? Yes, I believe in divorce concerning those couples that are in adulterous marriages. That is the only “divorce” that God honors, because such divorces are acts of repentance from adultery, not separating what God has joined together. These are unlawful marriages, so the “I hate divorce” statement from God does not apply. When God stated that, it was in reference to COVENANT marriage.

As far as the betrothal issue. Again it comes down to “putting away” as opposed to actual “divorce”. Tell me, can betrothed couples DIVORCE?

Matthew 1:18-24 answers your question.

for adultery, Jesus says the innocent wife is NOT free(even though Jesus gives us the example of her husband committing adultery through remarriage)—REALL? WHERE DOES JESUS SAY THAT??????

Again, Mt. 19:9—-Jesus gives the example of a man who puts away his wife and marries (commits adultery). He then, in the second part of the verse, states that anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. You seem to think the abandoned wife is AOK to get remarried. Jesus said the man who takes such a woman as his wife is committing adultery. She is NOT free to remarry—though her husband has remarried (committed adultery). So the verse which supposedly gives the right for a spouse to divorce their spouse due to adultery, negates the right for the “innocent” spouse in the second part of the verse. I don’t know why that is such a hard thing for people to grasp…….People want to say the first part of the verse says an innocent person CAN remarry, but then they say the second part of the verse doesn’t really mean what Jesus says………..it means something else? Ok, what else?

You admit that adultery is grounds for divorce You also admit that if a still married person marries another person they have committed adultery. Then you say that the innocent party has no grounds for remarriage because they are still married to their adulterous spouse even if they are free to DIVORCE them.

I never said such a thing. I think I was pretty clear in that I do not believe God wants believers to go to the civil law for divorces. I believe in SEPARATION (I Cor. 7:10-11) in the case of continual unrepentant adultery or abuse. I also said NUMEROUS times that even if a divorce takes place, the marital bond is NOT dissolved………they are still one flesh in the eyes of God, hence He says it is adultery to join with anyone else.

How is a husband whose wife marries someone else still legally bound to her? Do tell.

How is that the case? I don’t know……….ask John the Baptist………….he said even though Herodias divorced Philip and married Herod, she was Philip’s wife. Maybe you think John was confused over this? Maybe David was confused when he took Michal away from her second husband? Maybe God is confused that the 1st wife of Mal. 2 still is the “wife of the covenant” despite the fact that her husband divorced her and married another? Will you address these biblical examples or will you just giggle? Personally, I don’t think the adultery which plagues the “professing” church is a laughing matter, but I do understand the discomfort and maybe that is where your mocking is coming from??

So now you want to rewrite the scripture because you have been properly instructed here and now grasp the difference between “put away” and “divorce”. You know full well that Mt 19:9 refers to a “put away” wife ONLY. Which, as you have now learned, means that she is still married and of course cannot marry another and neither can her husband. “the 2nd part of the verse DOES NOT switch terms to include a DIVORCED woman, but you know that. Keep your argument honest. You lose credibility and appear desperate when you are disingenuous.

Again, Jesus was NOT speaking to the METHOD of putting away, He was addressing the ACT OF PUTTING AWAY—with or without a paper. You are resting on OT practices which Jesus rebuked. The fact is this: in the Old Testament a man COULD put away his wife—–without a writ of divorcement, and he was NOT considered an adulterer, he was a polygamist. This not only relates to women being put away as Jesus addresses a WOMAN putting away (divorcing) her husband as well in Mk. 10:12. Jesus was addressing DIVORCE, not putting away without paperwork. The woman in the second part of Matthew IS divorced……….the woman in the second part of Luke. 16:18 IS divorced………….”whosoever shall marry her that is DIVORCED commits adultery”.

The subject has never been about “civil divorce”. And as YOU have admitted here Jesus does allow for the dissolution of a marriage on the grounds of adultery. You contradict yourself. You may “believe in SEPARATION” in the case of adultery and indeed it is your prerogative. WHAT IT ISN’T IS A BIBLICAL MANDATE!

You are just being dishonest here because anyone that has been following our discussions can see that I have NEVER taken the stance that Jesus gives permission for a marriage joined by Him to be dissolved due to adultery within the marriage. As for separation, yes, indeed, that IS permissible (I Cor. 7:10-11). Some choose to continue living with one who is in unrepentant adultery, so choose to live apart until repentance takes place.

Dear heart, were any of the examples you provided LEGALLY divorced from their spouse????? Perhaps it is YOU that is confused here? AS MUCH AS YOU CAN NOT STAND IT, DIVORCE MEANT THEN (WHEN JESUS SPOKE ON IT) AND STILL MEANS TODAY THE TOTAL AND COMPLETE DISSOLUTION OF A MARRIAGE COVENANT. THE PARTIES ARE NO LONGER “ONE FLESH” IN THE EYES OF GOD OR ANYONE ELSE. How is a husband whose wife marries someone else still legally bound to her? Do tell. How is a husband whose wife marries someone else still legally bound to her? Do tell.How is a husband whose wife marries someone else still legally bound to her? Do tell.

How can a wife/husband be charged with adultery (called an adulterer/adulteress) when they have ILLEGALLY married another after divorcing their spouse—but the forsaken is freed from the marriage bond (their marriage is dissolved)? Either it is dissolved for BOTH, or neither. If, as you suppose, the new marriage has dissolved the original marriage(freed the forsaken party), why does John call Herodias, “Philip’s wife”? If Philip no longer belongs to her because she has now joined herself to another man, why does John charge Herod with having his brother’s wife? Why does God continue calling the first wife of the priest(Mal 2), “the wife of the covenant”, when he has taken another wife after divorcing his first? I do not have the problem here proving what I believe. What you are putting forth is that the “guilty” party is held continually in guilt…………..and held to the first marriage, yet the “innocent” one is free and is not bound to the one committing adultery against them…………if they are “not bound”, then the guilty is also not bound………….but that is not what the Word of God says, is it?

That’s funny Jesus called it adultery. Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. Lastblast, you do know what the definition of adultery is don’t you?

Yes, I do—“unlawful relations with one who is NOT your spouse”. “Whosoever puts away her husband and MARRIES another, commits adultery” (has unlawful relations with one who is not their husband). Todd and Jessa and Shoanna—–“Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, If Todd shall put away his wife Shoanna, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry Jessa, he committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth Shoanna doth commit adultery” You are saying that Shoanna CAN remarry…………..Jesus says, “no”………….whoever marries her commits adultery. Are you saying that Shoanna needs to petition the court for a “legal” divorce, THEN she can remarry? Is that what you see Jesus saying here?

Adultery carried a death penalty so if followed to the letter of the law the “innocent party” would be the only one still standing and also free to marry. Apparently the “letter of the law” was not always followed, this would be a non-issue if it were.

Yes, in the Old Testament, God commanded both people caught in adultery to be put to death…………….yet, what did Jesus do? He said, “go and sin no more”………..Jesus gave the ability to repent and forsake the sin. OT law did not give the guilty that. Is it your contention then that “some” people can consider their spouses DEAD, divorce them, and marry others, while other people can forgive their spouses, receive the repentant back OR continue praying for the wayward spouse to repent and have their family restored? You believe that BOTH situations are ok with God? How would you counsel with the Word of God in each situation, showing that whatever they chose to do would be ok with God?

Nope that is clearly not what I am saying. What I stated was the obvious. That being that OBVIOUSLY every offender was not stoned to death or this entire subject would have been a non-issue as it pertains to the grounds of adultery because all offenders would be dead and the legality of remarriage would have been moot.

Jesus didn’t stone the adulteress, did He………….that was OT law—-for the JEWS.

Putting away” is allowed on the grounds of adultery, DIVORCE is also allowed on the grounds of adultery.

I agree that “putting away” in regards to separation is allowed, but the dissolution of the marriage does not occur if someone decides they want to go before the civil authorities to get a piece of paper.

Jesus DID NOT dispute nor did he rewrite the LAW as it concerned the dissolution of marriage. What he did was protect women by not allowing their husband’s to put them away for any reason that they felt like giving. He reduced the terms under which a man could put away his wife to adultery only. Jesus DID NOT address the issue of divorce, he addressed “putting away” only. What was already in place concerning divorce remained intact.

In the Old Testament, it was NEVER considered adultery to marry another woman when one didn’t divorce their previous wife…………it was polygamy. Also, Jesus did not use the word “moichia”—adultery, He used the word “pornea”—fornication. Jesus DID dispute the law……………He brought marriage back to creation—where divorce was never given to man—for ANY reason “have you not heard?”. Jesus was VERY clear that divorce was only instituted for man’s Hardheartedness. You are saying that Jesus continued that allowance. The picture of Hosea/Gomer is God’s heart and example. Like I said, if you believe we “can” use this permission IF WE WANT TO—what does that say about those who use it versus those who do not, but remain faithful to the vows THEY took before their spouse and God.

Let me ask you something, showlove, since you believe adultery frees the so called “innocent” (though in God’s eyes the “innocent” may have contributed greatly to the marriage problems, adultery only being one of the issues present), at what point in the adulterous relationship is the other person free?? Is it when the other person files for divorce and it is granted? Is it the moment they take new vows with a different person? Is it the first time they consummate their illegal marriage? When exactly is the “innocent” freed from the bond of marriage with their covenant spouse?

If Todd puts away his wife then commits adultery with another Shoanna is free to divorce him. After Shoanna has obtained her divorce she is free to remarry.

Where in God’s Word do we find this, showlove? That is NOT what Jesus said.

A “put away” spouse was still married and COULD NOT marry anyone else. No divorce writ was required. However a spouse who was divorced and had a writ of divorce is no longer married and is free to remarry.

Yes, and Jesus made NO mention of the need for a writ of divorcement, so I’m not really sure why you keep focusing on that. His problem was with PUTTING AWAY—sending away of a spouse.

Where did Jesus say that he was establishing new law as it pertained to divorce?

15And He said to them, “You are those who (A)justify yourselves in the sight of men, but (B)God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God. 16″(C)The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time (D)the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17″(E)But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail. 18″(F)Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery. Can you find this teaching of Jesus’ in Moses’ divorce laws, showlove?

Well it appears that Jesus wasn’t for polygamy either. Thanks for that.

You’re right. As I said, Jesus brought marriage back to the creation intent—1 man/1woman for life……….no polygamy, no divorce. Polygamy=adultery, divorce/remarriage=adultery, because both deviate from the creation intent for marriage.

You know why the husband is guilty of adultery when he remarries? BECAUSE HE ONLY SEPARATED (PUT AWAY) HIS WIFE, THEREFORE HE WAS STILL MARRIED TO HIS FIRST WIFE WHEN HE TOOK ANOTHER AND THAT IS ILLEGAL. A DIVORCED MAN WAS AND STILL IS FREE TO REMARRY.

Jesus says he DIVORCES his wife……………you really need to do a study on every usage. Again, it seems you focus on a piece of paper and Jesus NEVER did……….putting away WAS divorce to Jesus. It was not dissolution. Paul teaches that dissolution only occurs at death, not before that time………….and it is because of that, whether one is DIVORCED(nothing more than a “legal” separation) or separated, it is adultery to join with another.

For those (standing for their covenant spouse) who honor their vows beyond what scripture, Jesus and God demand I say let each follow after his or her own heart. And God bless them. They are not in violation either way.

So, if a spouse was to wait on their wayward spouse who has entered into another “marriage” and that new couple came to your church and started becoming active there, would you support the covenant wife or would you support the 2nd wife? Would you tell this couple that they are living in adultery and that they need to forsake this unlawful relationship? See, this is the problem with the “they are not in violation either way”…………..ONE of them IS in violation. Either God only recognizes the first couple’s marriage and views the second as an adulterous union (which fits many in the church today) OR the “faithful” wife is in sin, coveting another woman’s husband. It can’t be both ways, showlove.

That is easy. God’s law states Deu 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house. then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house. then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house.

So, a piece of paper in her hand dissolves her marriage? You are not making any sense. In the above, you stated that if a person honors their vow “beyond what God demand”(and I don’t understand where you get the word “demand” from)………..God doesn’t demand divorce…………Jesus said divorce stemmed from hardheartedness, so I think we can pretty clearly ascertain that Jesus would never DEMAND a divorce (except in the case of an adulterous marriage). As I said you can’t have it both ways………….it’s ok for a spouse to stand in faith for their wayward spouse, desiring to see them repent and return to God OR not forgive if they cheat and then move on to another spouse (most of the time someone else’s spouse)………….I cannot see your reasoning here as it is illogical.

“so, a piece of paper in her hand dissolves her marriage”? .. Yep GOD said it does and Jesus did not change it. I did not write it, God did!

7″(A)FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER[a], 8(B)AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9″What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” 10In the house the disciples began questioning Him about this again. 11And He said to them, “(C)Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; 12and (D)if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.” Putting away and divorce is the SAME thing to Jesus……………NOWHERE IN ANY OF the gospel accounts will we find where Jesus legitimizes a “putting away” because of a piece of paper

Lastblast, .if a spouse was to wait on their wayward spouse The answer for those who are completely and legally divorced? Stop waiting!

In the example I gave you I asked about a wayward spouse who had entered into a forbidden marriage…………they are in adultery. Why would you counsel the faithful spouse to “stop waiting”…………..the wayward is not in a legimate marriage in the sight of God? The wayward BELONGS to the faithful spouse, not the 3rd party……….

I meant exactly that. If they CHOOSE to go beyond what the law requires and remain celibate and unmarried that is fine but not a requirement. Yes it is a noble thing. But don’t lie and say that it is a blanket command and an abandoned spouse has to stay married to the one who has legally divorced them.

What does the “law” REQUIRE, showlove?

“legally” divorced? Does the adulterer “legally” divorce? I thought you said only the “innocent” could “legally” divorce?

Will you answer this, showlove: “So, if a spouse was to wait on their wayward spouse who has entered into another “marriage” and that new couple came to your church and started becoming active there, would you support the covenant wife or would you support the 2nd wife? Would you tell this couple that they are living in adultery and that they need to forsake this unlawful relationship? See, this is the problem with the “they are not in violation either way”…………..ONE of them IS in violation. Either God only recognizes the first couple’s marriage and views the second as an adulterous union (which fits many in the church today) OR the “faithful” wife is in sin, coveting another woman’s husband. It can’t be both ways, showlove”.

If the wayward spouse and what you call the “covenant wife” are legally divorced then who to “support” is a non-issue

You said that a “legal” divorce can ONLY be obtained by the “innocent”……………….If the “innocent” has not obtained a divorce, but instead stands for the repentance of her husband and the restoration of her marriage, what do YOU do with that? There are MULTITUDES of men/woman standing and praying for the restoration of their marriages, while their wayward spouses present themselves and their partners in adultery as “good” church going people that just happen to have blended families. Will you stand side by side with a covenant wife against this adultery, showlove?

LOL! The wayward spouse cannot enter into another marriage if he is not divorced.

Nice try at trying to slip around my question. Here, I will lay it out as simply as I can:

A man divorces his covenant wife (through man’s laws which say that his first marriage is dissolved). He then marries another woman. The covenant wife does not believe in divorce, nor of separating what God has joined together. She reads His Word and sees God’s assessment of her husband is that he is now living in a state of adultery. She prays for her husband to come to repentance (which would entail him forsaking the adulterous relationship).

She is faithfully attending church and asking others to lift up her situation. The husband, who also attends there, now brings his new wife and their “blended” family to church. They are welcomed by most, though many still are grieved at how things came about. If you are in a prayer group with the forsaken wife, would you continue lifting up her prayers before the Lord, believing that she is praying the Will of God for her situation……………or would you rebuke her, telling her that her husband no longer belongs to her, but instead belongs to the woman God has said he is committing adultery with.

Simple answer. What would you do in such a case…………and this is not a “way out there” scenario. It is happening all the time in churches today…………..and there most certainly IS a biblical response to this situation. It is NOT “whatever feels right to you, is ok with God”…………. Blessings…….

If he divorces as stipulated under GOD’S LAW then his first marriage is completely dissolved and both parties are free to re-marry. If the man was not in relations with his 2nd wife prior to his divorce (not separation mind you) then in that case the man is not guilty of adultery.

That’s not what I asked you. I asked you if the man divorced his wife according to the laws of our land, remarried, etc, how would YOU respond, based upon your belief that only the “innocent” is allowed to divorce?

The fact that his first wife “doesn’t believe” in divorce or separating is neither here nor there as neither has the authority to establish what is lawful. In your scenario the only way the man can bring a NEW wife is if he was legally divorced. Other wise it would be impossible for the woman to be his NEW WIFE. I would pray for all and rebuke no one.

The first wife would be acknowledging GOD’S WORD as her authority……….God says her husband is in adultery………..their covenant is still inforce………….she’s praying for him to repent (forsake the adultery he is in) and not only return to her/family, but more importantly, return to GOD. I think you are showing what you really believe here. It IS all about a piece of paper and that was the very same thing the Pharisees were doing………..making sure they were “legal”. Jesus rebuked that, saying just cause you “think” you are legal, let me tell you the truth: You are adulterers if you divorce your wives and marry others”.

If a man or woman feels strongly that they should remain single and celibate then God bless them. I repeat Yes it is a noble thing. But don’t lie and say that it is a blanket command and an abandoned spouse has to stay married to the one who has legally divorced them.

It is not a NOBLE thing if they are praying for the restoration of their marriage and they are in fact COVETING another person’s spouse. If in fact this is true, then that is NOT honorable. However, if in fact, their spouse really IS their spouse, praying for them to repent of the adultery they are in and praying for a restored family IS biblical…………and IS the honorable thing to do. Like I said, showlove, it CAN’T be Both ways………..one is sinful or the other is sinful.

This is what it really says… Mar 10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall PUT AWAY his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. Mar 10:12 And if a woman shall PUT AWAY her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

Even those on the same side of the fence as you (who believe one can divorce for adultery and remarry other people) do not ascribe to your “put away” is not divorce theory. I know you WANT to believe that, but anyone who knows how to read can see that PUTTING AWAY—sending away your spouse, is what Jesus was talking about. He was NOT talking about sending your spouse away without papers. HE hates DIVORCE (the sending away of a COVENANT spouse). He doesn’t hate it any less/more if it’s done with the “proper” paperwork. Like I said, you seem to be of the same mindset as the Pharisees were that Jesus rebuked……….”if it’s “legal”, I’m good to go in God’s sight. Jesus said, “NOT SO”…………

Mat 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from [their] mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive [it], let him receive [it].

In the preceding verses, Jesus makes it clear to His disciples that not all men will accept His HARD teaching. Many had thought you could put a wife away for ANY reason and many had believed they could put a wife away for immorality. Jesus said something much different…………shockingly so, and His disciples reacted accordingly saying that it would then be better to NEVER marry under such restrictive guidelines. Jesus told them that not will accept His sayings, but only those to whom it has been given. We see this today in the responses (indignant) when this topic comes up. The “God does not want me to” argument comes around. “God wants me to be “happy””……….etc etc. Jesus said that there are those who made themselves Eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. They are those who ARE suffering loneliness…………….because they Love Jesus and desire to walk obediently before Him, even through suffering. For them, they are kingdom focuses, not fleshly/world now focused. (see I Cor. 7:10-11.) Showlove, it is not only ‘noble’ for the spurned spouse to pray for and love their wayward spouse as Christ loves, it is the calling of all true believers………..because we desire to be like Jesus and desire to have HIM live through us to touch all the “wayward” people in our lives. When we reject one wayward, that says much to all the other “waywards” in our lives……….those close to us and those who are forever watching all we say and do as Christians………..I Cor. 13 is our Guide, not only concerning our covenant marriages, but towards all………….Blessings…………..

BTW…who lied to you by telling you that covenants could not be broken. Please prove your assertion otherwise it is just wishful thinking on your part.

A quick look on the seriousness of covenant to God: A friend of mine wrote this: Jos. 9:15 About the Gibeonites’ deception and the covenant that was made with them – read whole of chapter nine. 2 Sam. 21:1-6 See how God reacted in verse one because of what King Saul did to the Gibeonites. See also how David had to make amends in verses 7-9. Jer. 34:8-22 The Jews undertook to free their slaves (made a covenant to do this – in the house of God) and later on changed their minds about it and re-enslaved their slaves again. Read how God reacted! Mal. 2:14 last part (marriage covenant) Read from verse 13-16. See how God reacted in verse 13 last part. Also see Ecclesiastes 5:4-7. Gal. 3:15b. Paul makes a comparison here. He says “Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established.” Also in verse 17 he says “the law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. NIV translation. So the law of a country cannot set aside a covenant”

A couple who has had a legally Jewish divorce are forbidden from remarrying each other. Both men and women are permitted to remarry after a divorce; however, a Kohen, a descendant of the holy priests, cannot marry a divorcee.

I find it quite telling that people have to go outside of God’s Word to “prove” that putting away is different from divorce or that a divorce has the power to dissolve what God joins together.

What do we make of this passage: Jeremiah 3:8……………….”And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; Then on to verse 14: Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion: How is it that some teach divorce dissolves a covenant, but right here we have God putting away WITH A WRIT of divorcement, yet says “I am married to you”…………..calling her to stop backsliding and return??

At any rate, a divorced spouse can still see themselves as married to their former spouse. Particularly, as we see here, if his or her hearts desire is to forgive and restore. That does not negate the fact that the couple is in fact divorced.

Notice EVERYTHING hangs on God’s command that Israel TURN, REPENT AND ACKNOWLEDGE HER INIQUITY. Without that (which Israel did eventually do) there would have been no restoration of the covenant between she and her husband. The covenant would have remained broken.

“a spouse can see themselves married………….”……………..no, the scripture says AFTER the divorce, “for I am married to you”………it’s not “wishful thinking” here, it is fact. Either a covenant is dissolved (no more) or it is not. Glad to see that (name deleted) doesn’t give in to the nonsense that “divorce is not the same as “putting away”………….Most can clearly see that putting away and divorce are one and the same and it is the act of separating oneself from who GOD joined them to that God hates (not that their paperwork in not in order)……………..

NOT if they can read…. APOSTASION Definition – divorce, repudiation a bill of divorce APOLUO a)polu/w from (575) and (3089) used of divorce, to dismiss from the house, to repudiate. The wife of a Greek or Roman may divorce her husband. to send one’s self away, to depart

They’re not the same, right?? Did you read the definitions you posted above??? They most certainly ARE used interchangeably, that is why even those who DO believe one can remarry after a divorce do not agree with your “put away” does not mean divorce. It clearly DOES mean divorce—-one and the same thing. God hates PUTTING AWAY—-the repudiating of one’s covenant spouse. It has NOTHING to do with having the proper paperwork and there is nothing in scripture to justify taking such a stance—IMHO, which I believe is fully, biblically backed up.

As for God divorcing Israel They would have remained DIVORCED if Israel had not repented. Notice EVERYTHING hangs on God’s command that Israel TURN, REPENT AND ACKNOWLEDGE HER INIQUITY. Without that (which Israel did eventually do) there would have been no restoration of the covenant between she and her husband. The covenant would have remained broken.

Notice in Jeremiah 3 that AFTER God said He gave a bill of divorcement to Israel, He says he IS married to her………….AFTER divorcement……….STILL MARRIED, NOT DISSOLVED…………………….

They are NOT used interchangeably. The fact that “used of divorce,” is mentioned wayyyyy down in the list of pertinent definitions testifies to how insignificant the “usage” of the term in this manner is.

Yes, they are used interchangeably when regarding the REPUDIATION of a covenant spouse. It is the REPUDIATION of one’s covenant spouse that God hates. Jesus NEVER spoke of the need to get a piece of paper to make REPUDIATION acceptable to Him. He hates the separating of what HE joined together. I am at a loss at your mental gymnastics trying to get around the very clearly presented truth in scripture. Every place we see “divorce” in scripture (in the Greek apostasion) it has to do with the PAPER. Jesus never addresses the paper…………..EVER.

If Jesus wanted to speak on divorce there would be NO NEED to use anything other than the term APOSTASION. When men APOLUO’d there wives God says that they dealt treacherously and he was not pleased.

Again, apostasion had to do with the PAPER…………MEN instituted the PAPER to make what they were doing (putting away/repudiating their wives) appear LEGAL. JESUS clearly told them that what they were doing was SINFUL. They WERE doing it “legal” (with writs of divorcement). Jesus said they were sinning by repudiating their wives!

Again your argument would have some validity had God used the term APOLUO anywhere in these scriptures.

That is the term Jesus/God uses time after time concerning the repudiation of one’s covenant spouse(APOLUO)—the act He said He hates. He did not use the term apostasion because that had to do with the paper involved with the repudiation, not the very act itself.

Matthew 5:32 (The Message) 31-32″Remember the Scripture that says, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him do it legally, giving her divorce papers and her legal rights’? Too many of you are using that as a cover for selfishness and whim, pretending to be righteous just because you are ‘legal.’ Please, no more pretending. If you divorce your wife, you’re responsible for making her an adulteress (unless she has already made herself that by sexual promiscuity). And if you marry such a divorced adulteress, you’re automatically an adulterer yourself. You can’t use legal cover to mask a moral failure. What you’re encouraging, Showlove, is EXACTLY what the Message above is speaking about……………using a piece of paper to appear “legal”, but truly it is a cover for selfishness……………it’s pretending one is “righteous” cause they did it “legal”, but the heart involved is FAR from righteous in the sight of God.

Apparently you only read what you like and block out whatever is written that you can’t stomach. How long have you held the belief that your ex is still married to you? How long have you believed (however erroneously) that you held the more superior higher ground? How long have you put your life on hold using your own error as an excuse not to get on with your life? How long have you tried to guilt your ex into coming back to you?

JFYI, I am IN a covenant marriage…………..so I’m not hanging on to my beliefs because I want what I do not presently have, as you assume. I believe what I do based upon God’s Word. I used to believe D/R was ok in God’s sight, until I studied this in depth……..and you know what? Years after the Lord showed me His heart on D/R, He continues to confirm this truth to me over and over again. Try to squeeze your understanding of divorce/remarriage into I Cor. 13………does it work? Try to fit your understanding of repudiating one’s spouse in Eph. 5…………..does it work? Those are only 2 examples……………….it’s a scary thing to rest one’s eternal destination on THEIR misunderstanding of 1 VERY disputed passage, clinging to their RIGHT to separate what has been joined together by God. I am very fearful for those who are in living with other people’s spouses (remarriage), for God’s Word is clear: Adulterers will NOT inherit the kingdom of God. I pray more and more people wake up and seek God on this issue, for the days may be very short…………….

Yes and we already know what YOUR definition of “covenant marriage” is even if you are in one all by yourself. C’est la vie

One can’t be in a covenant all by themselves. Michal and David were in a covenant——–that’s why he took her back AFTER she married another man. The priest of Mal. 2 and his first wife were in a covenant—-that’s why God called HER the wife of the covenant (not the second one). Herodias and Philip were in covenant—-even AFTER she divorced him and married Herod………….That’s why John accused Herod of having his brother’s wife, and lost his head for it. The scriptures support that adultery, a divorce paper, a new marriage, etc do NOT have the power to dissolve the ONE FLESH joined together by God. It is not my “private” interpretation, my “private” hopes/wishes/dreams, etc. I have my covenant spouse living with me, so as I said, I cannot be accused of having personal motives to want the permanency of marriage to be true———-the scriptures teach that, and it’s good enough for me.

You really ought to stop lying on God. The scripture DOES NOT SAY “whosoever divorces his wife”, the scripture reads…Mat 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: Stop lying.

Put away=divorce, REPUDIATING one’s covenant spouse……………….. Here is Robertson’s word pictures (greek rendering/commentary): Mark 10:12 If she herself shall put away her husband and marry another (ean auth apolusasa ton andra auth gamhsh). Condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of determination). Greek and Roman law allowed the divorce of the husband by the wife though not provided for in Jewish law. But the thing was sometimes done as in the case of Herodias and her husband before she married Herod Antipas. So also Salome, Herod’s sister, divorced her husband. Both Bruce and Gould think that Mark added this item to the words of Jesus for the benefit of the Gentile environment of this Roman Gospel. But surely Jesus knew that the thing was done in the Roman world and hence prohibited marrying such a “grass widow.” put away=divorce (repudiating one’s covenant spouse) Read all the various commentaries on the divorce passages……….I have not found ONE that says apouloo does not mean divorce as we understand it. All the commentators that I read believe the passages are about divorce, not just sending away a spouse without divorce papers………….

APOSTASION – Definition – divorce, repudiation, divorce, repudiation , divorce, repudiation , divorce, repudiation a bill of divorce Translated – KJV (3) writing of divorcement, certificate of divorce

See, it’s a PAPER—-apostasion is nothing more than the PAPERWORK showing what was done—divorce/putting away/repudiating one’s covenant spouse ……………..

The problem you have is that Jesus NEVER acknowledged a PAPER as having any meaning to HIM. If you want to make this about having the proper “legal” paperwork, so be it……………but Jesus said if one DIVORCES their spouse (with or without the paperwork matters not), they will be committing ADULTERY if they marry another person—and yes, He even included the forsaken one–the “innocent one”. I know you want to believe you are correct, but the scriptures and the context of what Jesus and Paul both taught on the issue of MDR do not agree with you…….

Showlove: would you please define for me again what exactly IS a “legal” divorce to you?………………

That which is according to the Law which was given to Moses by God. So what does THE LAW say? Deu 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house. Deu 24:2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s [wife]. …she may go and be another man’s wife …she may go and be another man’s wife …she may go and be another man’s wife There is NO provision for APOLUO (separation without dissolution of marriage and no writ of divorcement). There IS provision for APOSTASION (dissolution of marriage with a writ of divorcement) Jesus came against the commonly practiced CUSTOM “APOLUO” and he left fully intact APOSTASION as provided by law. Apoluo = ILLEGAL – commits adultery if remarried Apostasion = LEGAL – legal to remarry without the charge of adultery.

Ah, so you are reverting back to the TOLERATED practice in the OT law…………which Jesus ABROGATED………….yes, Jesus brought marriage BACK to the creation model—-one man/one woman for LIFE…………..NO LONGER TWO, but ONE FLESH.

As I said, you can keep trying to convince yourself Jesus was talking about a paper, but the fact is, He NEVER mentions the need for one to make ‘putting away’ LEGAL…………….ALL putting away of one’s covenant spouse and joining with another is ADULTERY, with or without a Paper………….Todd is presently IN ADULTERY with Jessa. They need to forsake their adultery in TRUE repentance and be restored with the Lord, and then Todd needs to be restored with the woman GOD joined him to—his covenant wife.

No LEGAL COVER to mask a moral failure (adultery)…………………..

As for 1Cor:13 Yes indeed, it fits just fine. 1 Cor. 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. God in his omnipotent wisdom provided a means whereby husbands could not divorce their wives for any and every reason that came to their minds. That’s protection, that’s love. But should they separate and to provide continued protection and care her husband had to give her a writ of divorcement so that she would then be free to LEGALLY marry someone else. That’s mercy, that’s love. God does not want you or anyone else to live out your life sad and miserable while clinging to false hopes founded on false understanding. That’s compassion, that’s love.

LOVE SUFFERS long……………………….(even when one is “sad and miserable”)……………………LOVE does NOT seek it’s own…………Love is KIND……………….LOVE does not rejoice in iniquity (the workings of which separate man from God eternally, see Mt. 7:21-23). Love BEARS ALL THINGS, BELIEVES ALL THINGS (no false hopes), HOPES ALL THINGS (repentance of adultery for the wayward), ENDURES ALL THINGS (yes, even loneliness/rejection), LOVE NEVER fails! LOVE NEVER FAILS…………………….now, when we read I Cor. 13, what about the forsaken spouse? Are they entitled by God to “forget” the erring one…………and move on—-most likely taking another person’s spouse as their own and intermingling their families, much to the upset of many in the immediate family not to mention the extended families? Is this God? IS God the approver of wife/husband swapping because things don’t’ “work out” with the first ones? Does God teach us in His Word that it is ok to give up on those who are blinded in their sin—especially one that HE joined us to? I just don’t believe so. Even in your response, Showlove, all that is there is FLESH, not God’s Spirit, which leads us to LOVE, even in the most difficult situations. God’s ultimate goal for US, His followers, is for US to be a reflection of Him………………..HE LOVES—–I Cor. 13…………so should we. Blessings