Please read the OP in the link at the bottom. This is about letting the words in Matt 5:31,32 to stand very literally as they are plainly written. When the exception is assumed to allow divorce for adultery then the LITERAL meaning of the verse is convoluted. When willing to try another explanation of what the exception clause then the sentence becomes simple and straightforward. Matt 5:31,31 then fully SUPPORTS the literal message in Mark 10:2-12 Luke 16:18 1 Cor 7:39 and Ro 7:2,3.
So what would make sense to you? Choose an explanation of the exception clause that means we can not take at literal face value the easily written verses in Mark Luke and by Paul?
Please accept the challenge as presented in the OP that I linked to. Make a sentence to parallel the basic function of Matt 5:31,32. This is a very educational exercise. It can liberate you to see how wonderfully the word of God vindicates itself.
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/102222-challenge-those-who-believe-jesus-allows-divorce-after-adultery.html[/QUOTE]
Mat 5:32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for
the reason of fornication, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
First, it seems straightforward when we take the meaning God gives to both words throughout history. That meaning is:
Fornication(Pornea) = All illicit sexual intercourse this includes:
- Premarital sex
- Homosexual intercourse
- Bestiality
- Adultery
Adultery(moichaō) = The destruction of an existing family unit to form another one. This includes:
- A husband divorcing his wife to marry another woman.
- A wife divorcing her husband to marry another man.
- A husband having sexual intercourse with a woman who is the wife of another man still living.
- A wife of a living man having sexual intercourse with a man who is not her husband.
- A man marrying a woman who is divorced from a man still living.
- Unless her husband was a non-believer and left her. (1 Cor. 7)
What the definition of adultery does not include:
- A husband with a living wife having intercourse with a woman who is not married to another living man. This is fornication of a different type than adultery. The man gets another wife with no possibility of divorce.
- A man taking another wife. There is no prohibition against this in scripture (See earlier posts where I bring up the scriptures related to this.)
Now, using God’s definitions for all the meanings of the words used, lets take another look at the verse:
Mat 5:32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for
the reason of fornication(pornea)
Can a woman commit any fornication, illicit sexual intercourse, and not destroy an existing family unit, according to God’s definition? If she got married for the only good reason for it, in new testament times, which is listed in 1 Cor. 7, and the marriage was there to prevent the issues listed in 1 Cor. 7 from occurring (again fornication) and she doesn’t have the “gift” of celibacy, but has the “Other gift” of having issues with control in that area, what does her not having a husband to cover this issue result in according to 1 Cor. 7? Fornication. Is fornication adultery? Could be? Is adultery fornication? Most definitely, (So are the rest of the things in the list above.)
Now, can a woman do the same thing, divorce her husband for the cause of fornication according to God’s definitions of the words and terms, and according to all that He, and godly men and women have said and done, and have not said, and have not done? The answer is no, UNLESS WHAT THE HUSBAND DID WAS ADULTERY!
- Again, according to God’s definition. Polygamy is not adultery. It is totally allowable, and God even participates in it in scripture by giving David the wives of his enemies, commanding that when we take another wife not to lessen the spousal support or marital rights of the first wife …
- Again, premarital intercourse with an available woman (See above) is a sin of fornication, but it is NOT ADULTERY and is not a cause for divorce. The man gains another wife with no possibilities of divorce.
, makes her commit adultery
Again, look at God’s definition of all the words / terms. Is there any way at all for a woman seeking God’s best, who got married for the only reasons given in the N.T. to seek to get married, in 1 Cor. 7, not to commit adultery according to God’s definition and what is stated in 1 Cor. 7?
; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
The woman, in this situation, is still bound to her first husband in the eyes of God. Divorce is NOT ALLOWED in this situation.
NEXT PASSAGE:
Mar 10:11 And He *said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; 12 and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."
Again, God’s definition of adultery = The destruction of an existing family unit to form another one.
Mar 10:11 And He *said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her;
Who is committing “adultery” in this part of the passage? The husband. Why is it adultery? Because it causes the destruction of an existing family unit to form another one? Who causes this? The one doing the action of destroying the current family unit: the husband. Is this plainly written? Yes. Is the meaning clear? Yes. Is the meaning fully in line with God’s definition of the words and terms? Yes. I see no issues. Let’s continue:
Mar 10:12 and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery."
Again, what is the action, divorcing her husband? Who is destroying the current family unit? The wife. Why is it adultery? Because it was done for a reason not allowed by God. She is still bound, in the eyes of God, to that first man.
Keep in mind that the law said that both committing adultery should be stoned to death. Adultery resulted in a clean slate for the non-offending spouse in the eyes of God, with no need for divorce. Yes, God’s example in Hosea, if we are seeking to be godly, and do not have a hard heart, should be followed. Yes, if Gomer was a godly woman she should have repented and come back to her husband and not strayed / committed adultery again.
Also keep in mind that the people listening to these things did not have the screwed up definitions of words and terms that we in our “Modern Western Society” changed them to. They had God’s definitions and knew them. These things are “Exceedingly clear” and “Very straight forward”, IF YOU START WITH GOD’S DEFINITIONS. Next:
Luk 16:18 "Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.
What is the husband doing here? He is “Committing adultery”. How? He is destroying an existing family relationship to form another one. Could he marry the second woman without divorcing the first and be in line with all God and godly men and women believed was good, and all that the O.T. says and doesn’t say on the issue? Absolutely. Would it have been adultery if he had done this? No, he would have just added a wife to the existing biblical family unit of: Husband, wife or wives, and all children by them.
Since God does not acknowledge a divorce for this reason, the original family unit, in the eyes of God, still remains intact, and the man is still, in the eyes of God, responsible for his first wife. Therefore, anyone who marries her is committing adultery. Clear, concise? Yes. Next:
1Co 7:39 A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.
Again, all of the other stuff is assumed. THIS IS NOT A PASSAGE ABOUT DIVORCE. This is about how long a wife is bound to her current husband, it’s for life. Although the passage doesn’t discuss it, the same is true the other way as well. Clear? Concise? You bet. Next:
Rom 7:2 For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband.3 So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.
First part: Rom 7:2 For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband.
Same thing as in 1 Cor. 7. How long does a marriage last? Until the death of your spouse.
The next part only works one way according to the word of God. It is not, necessarily true the other way around. i.e. husbands taking another (God approved) wife.
3 So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.
The passage is not about divorce, it’s about adultery though. What is God’s definition of adultery? The destruction of an existing family unit to form a new one. In this case she has physically bound herself to a different family unit, and so, is an adulteress.
Read your other treatise as well. Here’s the part I think we are sticky on:
Matt 5:
A) It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
B) But I say unto you,
1) That whosoever shall put away his wife,
2) saving for the cause of fornication [read as adultery] (Nope: it is fornication, the overall topic. Adultery is in the category of fornication, not vice versa. Any fornication is adultery for a woman. Premarital sex with an appropriate single woman gains the husband a new wife with no hope for divorce, and is fornication, but is not cause for divorce from the first wife, even by O.T. law. )
3) causeth her to commit adultery: (Already discussed in comments prior on 1 Cor. 7)
4) and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, as is described in THIS CONTEXT, of THIS PASSAGE, i.e. not having been put away for the cause of her own fornication) committeth adultery.
Is that clearer for you?
The issue is that, in the eyes of God, while not consummated, a betrothal constitutes a binding “marriage” contract before Him. Joseph could have had Mary executed for being found with child “Adultery” before being married. It was adultery.
Often there are two possible ways to do things, start with our definitions, and gather what we can to gather what we can “Use” to prove our beliefs true, and what we can “use” to prove all other opinions false, or we can gather every single thing that might “seem” to pertain, carefully examine the context, flow of thought, flow of discussion, flow of arguments, research every key word, and root word as they are used throughout all the scriptures, Old and New Testaments, and find the meaning that fits fully with each and every word, and the exact meaning each and every passage that applies, distorting nothing, adding no meaning that isn’t there, subtracting no meaning that is there, and putting everything together so that everything fits with all that is said, and not said, done, and not done. Altering our beliefs to fit the fullness of the truth of all that God has given us.
That which we love least will always be altered to fit that which we love most. We all love either our beliefs (And we use the first methodology) or we love the truth (and we use the second methodology) more. What we habitually do shows what we love.
Most people want to avoid the work of trying to gather everything that might apply to the topic at hand, and cutting each and every passage out straight in the context in which each is found, and careful study of the meaning God gave to words because:
1.) It's work
2.) It takes time, sometimes lots of it.
3.) It interferes with what they want to believe to be true, and they love what they believe t be true, and have closed their eyes and ears lest their beloved beliefs get destroyed.
There are those that will take great amounts of time, and will make great efforts laboring to prove their beliefs true with all their heart mind soul and strength ... but again, the methodology proves what you really love and want. No belief, or belief group ever got to truth by gathering everything they can use to prove their beliefs true, and everything they could use to prove all opposing beliefs false, and interpreting all of their selected data in the light of their beliefs. All any belief group can do with this methodology is to harden themselves into whatever beliefs they already have and love.
