MInTheGap

Standing in the Gap in a Society that's Warring with God.

Divorce and the Believer – I Corithians 7:10-17, 39-40: Separation, Divorce, and Can the Believer Remarry?

June 11th, 2018 Viewed 352 times

Where Does Paul Derive His Instruction on Divorce and Remarriage?

First, from the law—Paul infers that the husband is more able/likely to divorce the wife than vice versa, choosing to use the term separate more than divorce in this passage (1 usage of wife divorcing). Second from Jesus in the Gospels—Jesus was clear in the Gospels that marriage was for life, and though He may/may not have allowed an exception for pornea, the position still was very clear.

There is some clarification to the book of Ezra in the sense that Paul tells the believers to stay married to unbelievers.

What are the commands in this passage?

  • A wife should not separate from her husband—if she does, she is to remain single or be reconciled and a husband should not divorce his wife.
  • If an unbelieving spouse is willing to remain married, they should stay married.
  • If an unbelieving spouse chooses to separate from the believing spouse, the remaining spouse is not enslaved.
  • A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives, she may remarry after he dies, but should marry a believer, though Paul believes she would be happier single.

Does the Passage Leave Any Room for Christians to Get Divorced?

photo by: DiemLegal

Jesus on Marriage – Divorce and Heaven

May 21st, 2018 Viewed 663 times, 2 so far today

What does Jesus have to say on the topic of Divorce? (Matt 5:31-32, 19:3-12; Mark 10:1-12; Luke 16:18)

The religious leaders ask if a man can divorce his wife for any reason, hoping to catch him in between two different sets of beliefs on the topic—hoping to alienate Him with one group. Instead, He takes it back to Genesis, showing that it wasn’t good for man to be alone and that God made the two into one flesh. Therefore, there is no provision for divorce. This is consistent across all passages.

So the religious leaders take him to Deut 24, and ask why Moses included divorce. Jesus tells them that it is permission, not rule, and that it was because the Jewish men had hard hearts. This goes toward the fact that the Jewish men could have treated their wives harshly before the law, and Moses was protecting the women while respecting the rights of the man. The rule did not change.

By the Book – Marriage from the Israelite Law – Part 1

March 18th, 2018 Viewed 569 times

In order to understand marriage from a Biblical sense, you need to set aside your current understanding of modern marriage and start to explore what the Bible says about men and women and marriage– what does it say in the law, and how were these things done back then.

What was the status of a single woman?

“Ask me for as great a bride-price and gift as you will, and I will give whatever you say to me. Only give me the young woman to be my wife.” – Genesis 34:12

If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride-price for her and make her his wife.
– Exodus 22:16

The unmarried woman was considered to be a virgin, and she lived in her father’s house under his protection until such time as a man came and sought her out to be his bride. This could be for any number of reasons. Samson saw a woman and was physically attracted to her and requested that his father get her to make her his bride. Jacob fell for the beauty of Rachel and worked 14 years for her (again, a price for her). Abraham sent out his servant with money and possessions to procure Rebekah for Isaac. Throughout the Old Testament, the arrangement of marriage was more a financial transaction than one where compatibility was sought.

The unmarried woman, living in her father’s house, was transferred into her husband’s jurisdiction by his payment of the ‘bride price’ (Heb. mohar) to her father. If a man seduced a girl, he had to pay the bride price as a penalty and make her his legal wife.

photo by: be creator

Marriage and the Book of Ezra

December 7th, 2016 Viewed 2048 times

windowslivewriterhowlongshouldamarriagelast-14ea8sunset-bride-groom-header4.jpg

There are difficult passages in the Bible– ones that, on the surface, don’t seem to square with ones we find in other places.  One of these passages is in the book of Ezra.  In Ezra 10, Ezra the priest has read the law that he found in the temple and has come across a problem– the exiles from Israel had transgressed the law of God in regards to marrying foreign women.  God wanted Israel to stay pure and only to marry other Israelites.  Some of the captives even had children with these foreign women.  What to do?

Ezra and the priests decide that all those who had married foreign wives must put them away, or divorce them.  If they had children, they should be put away as well.  This would be an arduous task, and they expected it to take some time to be pure again.

Christian Marriages

June 22nd, 2009 Viewed 2146 times

sunset bride groom header

The last of this Atheist’s most convincing arguments is probably his weakest.  He claims that because:

  1. Each “Christian Couple” that gets married has witnesses and people praying for the success of their marriage.
  2. The minister says “What God has put together let no man put asunder”
  3. Christian couples still get divorced.

That this means that Christianity is a fallacy.

Practicing Failure

February 8th, 2008 Viewed 2385 times

window shopping header

One of the standard arguments you hear for cohabitation today is that it is practice for marriage. The reasoning goes something like this:

I may be living in sin now, but at least I’ll know what she’s like. I’ll know what I’m in for. I’ve done my window shopping, now it’s time for a test drive before I commit to buy.

The problem with this logic– it’s fault– is that it really isn’t practicing for marriage, it’s practicing for divorce.

TV Shows That Never Would Have Been: Green Acres

February 5th, 2007 Viewed 2169 times

So, I was standing in front of my sink the other night and for some reason the theme song to Green Acres was running through my head. I grew up in the time period where you could catch some of these shows on Nick-at-Nite (can’t remember if they were still making new ones when I was a child) and the theme song was always something that I found funny– if not Zsa Zsa Gabor’s accent.

How Would You Choose to Save Marriage?

October 23rd, 2006 Viewed 15413 times

Marriage is an institution worth saving. It can be the source of greatest joy and stability for the couple as well as for children. It is something that is a blessing to those inside it and for those to whom it ministers.

However, it is being attacked from every angle– internally and externally.

Externally, it is devalued by same sex unions and cohabitation. It is degraded and cheapened by these in the sense that if anyone can be partners at any time and in by whatever means necessary, why should a man and a woman feel the desire or necessity to marry?

Internally, it is attacked by the greater prevalence of divorce. Since more people are getting divorced and it has easier to follow this route, more couples are settling disagreements in court with attorneys than in their houses with love for one another seeking to place the other first.

So, how would you choose to save it?

An Australian company believes that the way to do this is to subsidize lingerie.

“We need something to help people overcome these traumatic problems, and subsidized lingerie would mean women would feel a lot better, and their hubbies will feel a lot better,” Lee told Australia’s AAP news agency.

“But good lingerie is very expensive. You used to be able to buy a pair of knickers for 1 dollar, but now 20 dollars will get you very little.”

I had to laugh at the part about buying “very little” in the same discussion of lingerie, but I think this guy is missing the key part here. We’re not going to strengthen marriage through underwear.

I believe that the secret to building marriage back up has to begin with attacking what has made it weakest. I think that you have to remove the possibility of divorce. I can hear some of you now– “but what if the wife beats her husband and constantly sends him to the emergency room? Shouldn’t he have a way to get out?” In short, no– at least, not in the ways he can now.

I’m all for protecting a battered spouse and children– through the criminal system and imprisoned if necessary. But eliminating the possibility of divorce would go a long way to making marriage stronger. For one thing, you would think about who it was that you were going to marry a lot harder if you knew that there wasn’t an escape clause.

The next thing that I would do to save marriage was to stop any redefinition or copies. I would reinforce the stigma that used to be on those who “lived in sin” and state, like they did in Missouri, that they either have to get married or get out. Take away the domestic partnership benefits, the joint bank accounts for unmarried people– all the perks that those that are living together get that are breaks that used to be for married people alone.

Finally, I would offer easier access to counseling, and have some kind of monthly or yearly checkups with someone so that if there are issues that need to be worked through they can be dealt with instead of allowing them to fester.

What would you do to save marriage?

MInTheGap

Standing in the Gap in a Society that's Warring with God.