Comments

Divorce, Remarriage, and Adultery — 7 Comments

  1. I just wanted to comment on your article, Divorce, Remarriage and Adultery. I really enjoyed reading it and I’m glad someone has taken the time to explain about this unfortunate problem that seems to be consuming America over the past several years. Thank you and God bless!

  2. 90% of this article is correct. There is NO out for remarriage after a person is divorced…..by either party for any reason. What God has joined together man must not separate. Remain unmarried or be reconciled to your spouse. The Holy Bible (KJV) does not say “Remain unmarried or be reconciled to your EX-spouse”. Even when to people become unmarried (divorced), that scripture still titles the persons as spouses (husband or wife is the definition of “spouse”) to each other when it states remain unmarried or be reconciled to your spouse. So, while you are UNMARRIED, God still sees you as a SPOUSE. Which means that just because you are living apart through divorce, you are still considered as “ONE” with each other in the mandate of God in reference to this matter.

    Why would God still call your former or “unmarried” partner as SPOUSE, even after you’ve divorced them? This is not a rhetorical question. I would really like this one to be answered.

    • We live in a fallen world and Gods design is perfect but we are imperfect in the flesh. Jesus said except for marital unfaithfulness and my wife is a serial cheater after 25 years yet I have put up with it but I have reached my end. I will divorce her now. Im sure God weeps with me and I didn’t want this. My heart is broken. I will not remarry anyway although I have a right to if I so choose according to Jesus and I stand by His authority not man or mans twisting of scripture.

  3. When you have no fault divorce as we do in America that makes marriage null and void. They are as worthless as the piece of paper they are on and its not under God but under your government. Read the fine print folks.

  4. Concerning Matthew 19:9, it seems strange that having denied the Pharisee’s request for a single divorce exception (“any reason”?) in the strongest terms, Jesus should moments later, provide them with a truly major loophole. Also strange that such a crucial exception should be missing from the “parallel” account in Mark 10.
    If we check out the Greek manuscripts, we find that there is a small but crucial difference between the Textus Receptus and both the Majority and Critical texts, being the insertion of “ei” in front of “me epi porneia”. The honest scholar will find that this conveniently changes the sense of the phrase from an exclusion to an exception.
    As we see from the account of the woman caught in adultery (John 8), the Law prescribes death (not divorce)for adultery. Irrespective of whether this Law was being enforced at the time, there are major and obvious reasons why Jesus would need to exclude the special case of adultery from his response to a legal challenge. The Jerusalem and Orthodox Jewish Bibles are virtually alone in rendering His response correctly.
    It seems that we largely have the early humanist Erasmus, to thank for this destructive heresy, which has lead to the scandalous wholesale divorce among God’s people. Inevitably, the exception has become the rule.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *