remarriage after divorce

[sprky777]

I know this topic has probably been debated to death, so this should be simple:

Romans 7
1Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

2For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

3So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
Matthew 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: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Matthew 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.
...many more verses that say the same thing...
Is this an absolute? The verses are consistant in that it specifies the woman may not remarry, it doesn't specify that a man cannot remarry. In general, it appears that under certain circumstances a man can remarry, but never can a woman remarry.

Without overt rationalization, even though this seems gender biased, is this a rule that Christians should strictly follow? Or should we just continue under the dictum 'better to act and ask forgiveness than to ask and be denied'?

[James Peter]

It depends. What is your stance on polygamy? From a fundamentalist pov it is perfectly acceptable for a man (if he isn't in a leadership position at least) to have 2, 3 or more wives. Of course a woman can't have multiple husbands. The very nature of 'adultery' is either a (married) woman sleeping with a man who is not her husband or a man sleeping with another man's wife...

I'm not saying that I advocate such standards of conduct amongst christians but that seems to be what 'the law' says on the subject...

[Anoetos]

Well, inasmuch as I think even the hardest fundamentalist would admit that polygamy is not required by Scripture such that no conflict could exist between the law of men and the law of God, wouldn't the civil law prevail?

[themuzicman]

I know this topic has probably been debated to death, so this should be simple:





Is this an absolute? The verses are consistant in that it specifies the woman may not remarry, it doesn't specify that a man cannot remarry. In general, it appears that under certain circumstances a man can remarry, but never can a woman remarry.

Without overt rationalization, even though this seems gender biased, is this a rule that Christians should strictly follow? Or should we just continue under the dictum 'better to act and ask forgiveness than to ask and be denied'?
I think Paul uses the woman as the example in this setting because mankind is seen as being in submission to law or grace (depending on salvation status), and, at least in terms of being bound, more like the woman in a marraige.

However, it's pretty clear both from Paul and Jesus that the man is likewise bound until death.

Michael

[James Peter]

It is clear that the man is bound to take care of his wife until death but not that he may only have a single wife. I'm not saying that a man can abandon his wife, but there is an inherenant inequality between the man's rights and the woman's - you can't just read modern, western notions of equality into the text...

But yes Anoetos it is perfectly acceptable (and almost certainly 'better') to take just a single wife. That is my intention and what I would advise to any who sought my counsel on this issue. The problem with 'civil law' is that it is (1) very local (2) in a democracy can be changed to reflect the accepted norms of the electorate and most importantly I don't think that being conducted in accordance with local civil law is what makes a marriage valid or invalid. If a man and his wife were to go to another culture which did not recognise the validity of their marriage ceremony would they cease to be married? Similarly, just because somebody is not married in the eyes of the local law does not mean that they are not married before God... If a couple live faithfully together for 30 years and raise children together are they really less married than, say, the hollywood couple who get married and divorce 18 months later? Civil law doesn't dictate marriage, at most it recognises it. For once I agree with the Catholic understanding of marriage - it is a sacrament (well, not actually a sacrament in my mind but anyway) that a man and a woman perform themselves and the priest merely recognises.

[Teallaura]

I know this topic has probably been debated to death, so this should be simple:



Romans 7
1Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

2For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

3So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.


Look at the context here; Paul is comparing men under the law to women under the headship of men - it's a direct comparison, not a limitation by gender. Males would make no sense in this context, which is why Paul uses women for his example.





Matthew 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: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.


Matthew 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.


...many more verses that say the same thing...

*emphasis mine

Compare to this:

Jesus said to His disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come. It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. So watch yourselves."

*emphasis mine

It's not a stretch to apply the principle in Luke to the verse in Mark - if hubby is causing wifey to sin, is he not sinning himself? It would appear so - hence divorce is not permissible for a man but not a woman. Why would remarriage not fall under the same catagory?



Is this an absolute? The verses are consistant in that it specifies the woman may not remarry, it doesn't specify that a man cannot remarry. In general, it appears that under certain circumstances a man can remarry, but never can a woman remarry.
I don't think it's even established- your verses are out of context and not all inclusive. You forgot:

"Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."

*emphasis mine

Significant since in this verse only the men are referred to as commiting adultery - and it pretty well shoots down your thesis. The prohibition is not exclusive to women.


Without overt rationalization, even though this seems gender biased, is this a rule that Christians should strictly follow? Or should we just continue under the dictum 'better to act and ask forgiveness than to ask and be denied'?

I'm not sure I follow you - you mean for men? I'd say so, given the verse I cited. However, that dictum is usually a way to get into trouble, not out of it. Better to look first before leaping.

[sprky777]

...it pretty well shoots down your thesis. The prohibition is not exclusive to women.

I'm not sure I follow you - you mean for men? I'd say so, given the verse I cited. However, that dictum is usually a way to get into trouble, not out of it. Better to look first before leaping.
I agree. It is best to not marry after divorce. Marriage has permanence. Scripture teaches permanence of marriage. Jesus said 'as it was in the beginning with Adam and Eve' divorce was never intended. We make our choices and we should live with them.

We should all strive to please our mates and do what is right for them. Since divorce is not an option, don't allow that thought to enter into your mind. The only solution to an unhappy marriage is to make it into a happy one. Focus on what it takes to improve it not tear it down. Even as Christians we are taught to build each other up, even moreso we should love our wives as ourself and build them up.
...What is your stance on polygamy? From a fundamentalist pov it is perfectly acceptable for a man (if he isn't in a leadership position at least) to have 2, 3 or more wives. Of course a woman can't have multiple husbands...
Again, I agree. Marriage is between man and God, not man and state. Even though a state may not recognize a union between a man and a woman in certain circumstances, God sees them become one and acknowledges the intent with respect to permanence. The secular world doesn't understand the depth of meaning in marriage. We as Christians have gone a long way towards 'marriages of convenience' ourselves and should strive to rectify our situations. We should set an example for society not become a spectacle. Sometimes our own hipocrisy, evident in our worldly actions are the greatest detriment to the salvation of others. We are not only responsible for ourselves but our spouses and everyone that we interact with.

[commonman]

I know this topic has probably been debated to death, so this should be simple:

Is this an absolute? The verses are consistant in that it specifies the woman may not remarry, it doesn't specify that a man cannot remarry. In general, it appears that under certain circumstances a man can remarry, but never can a woman remarry.

Without overt rationalization, even though this seems gender biased, is this a rule that Christians should strictly follow? Or should we just continue under the dictum 'better to act and ask forgiveness than to ask and be denied'?

Why are you asking the question? Is it...

A. Because you are in the situation and are looking for some guidance?
B. Because a friend or acquaintance is in this situation and is asking for some guidance?
C. Because you heard someone preach or teach on the subject and their conclusion bothers you at some level deep within?
D. Because you are just curious and had nothing else to do at the moment?
E. Because a friend or acquaintance is in this situation and you feel compelled to give some advice?
F. Other: Please Specify

Or it could be some combination of the above.

If A. If you feel convicted to not remarry, then don't. If you think the prohibition against remarraige is hogwash, then ignore it. Pray and let the Holy Spirit do its work and reveal in perfect clarity what you should do. If it is not clear and without doubt, don't do it.

If B. See above and be there to celebrate and/or console.

If C. Study the scriptures and come to know the answer to A for yourself.

If D or E. Get a life.

If F. Love God with all your heart, mind, body and soul. And love your neighbor as yourself.

Good luck and stop trying to find a rule for good living in scripture. The Bible is not about you and your salvation, but Jesus the Christ, God's Messiah!