• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Question about adultery and divorce

MichaelZ

MichaelZ

New Member
Male
According to the Matthew, if a woman committed adultery by having sex with other man, the husband has right to divorce her.

The question is: how about the husband committed adultery with other man's wife. Does the man's wife has right to divorce her husband? According to the definition of adultery in the Bible, I think although the husband was guilty of adultery, but it has nothing to do with his own wife. It sounds a little weird to me.
 
ZecAustin said:
Of course if we were really doing things God's we'd stone the fool and she'd be a widow.
Click to expand...
It would seem that way, and a logical argument can certainly be made for it - except there are multiple cases of adultery in scripture, yet I cannot find a single example of this punishment actually being carried out. In some cases a punishment of some form occurred, but not that prescribed in the law. For instance:

Pre-Moses:
  • Reuben & Bilhah - no stoning.
  • Tamar suspected of adultery - almost stoned, but not in the end.
Post-Moses:
  • David & Bathsheba - neither was stoned (there was a punishment, the baby died, but no stoning).
  • Absalom and David's 10 concubines - no specific punishment (later died in battle).
  • Hosea's adulterous wife - not stoned, forgiven instead.
  • The woman caught in adultery and presented to Yeshua - not stoned.
Case study to ponder: Would it have been right for Abigail to divorce David for his adultery with Bathsheba? Or did this have nothing to do with Abigail, was it between David, Bathsheba, Uriah and God?
 
Although a little off topic but still involving broken marriage; what is y'alls take on 1 Cor. 7:15 where the unbeliever departs? For the brother or sister not being enslaved or under bondage, is he or she free to remarry? Appreciate your insights.
 
FollowingHim said:
It would seem that way, and a logical argument can certainly be made for it - except there are multiple cases of adultery in scripture, yet I cannot find a single example of this punishment actually being carried out. In some cases a punishment of some form occurred, but not that prescribed in the law. For instance:

Pre-Moses:
  • Reuben & Bilhah - no stoning.
  • Tamar suspected of adultery - almost stoned, but not in the end.
Post-Moses:
  • David & Bathsheba - neither was stoned (there was a punishment, the baby died, but no stoning).
  • Absalom and David's 10 concubines - no specific punishment (later died in battle).
  • Hosea's adulterous wife - not stoned, forgiven instead.
  • The woman caught in adultery and presented to Yeshua - not stoned.
Case study to ponder: Would it have been right for Abigail to divorce David for his adultery with Bathsheba? Or did this have nothing to do with Abigail, was it between David, Bathsheba, Uriah and God?
Click to expand...

Also, there is the case of Mary's presumed infidelity. Joseph wanted to put her away quietly. One thing about many of these cases, with the notable and obvious exception of Absalom is that it may have been very difficult to find 2 to 3 actual witnesses to stand against the accused. Without such witnesses, it would be impossible to give a death sentence.
 
FollowingHim said:
It would seem that way, and a logical argument can certainly be made for it - except there are multiple cases of adultery in scripture, yet I cannot find a single example of this punishment actually being carried out. In some cases a punishment of some form occurred, but not that prescribed in the law. For instance:

Pre-Moses:
  • Reuben & Bilhah - no stoning.
  • Tamar suspected of adultery - almost stoned, but not in the end.
Post-Moses:
  • David & Bathsheba - neither was stoned (there was a punishment, the baby died, but no stoning).
  • Absalom and David's 10 concubines - no specific punishment (later died in battle).
  • Hosea's adulterous wife - not stoned, forgiven instead.
  • The woman caught in adultery and presented to Yeshua - not stoned.
Case study to ponder: Would it have been right for Abigail to divorce David for his adultery with Bathsheba? Or did this have nothing to do with Abigail, was it between David, Bathsheba, Uriah and God?
Click to expand...
With all due respect, silence means nothing.
God gave a law and had its punishment recorded. I don't think he was thinking hyperbole. Any good parent knows that if you give a threat/consequence, you better follow through with it, or you will have rebellion. I believe these cases mentioned exemplified God's intervening grace (we've had whole threads go ballistic on whether God can overrule His own Laws). These are the exceptions, not the rule. None of us were there, but I bet a couple of stonings every other year ensured that this law had to be respected.
 
I think Samuel's point was simply that there were exceptions to the rule, in response to Zec's assertion that if we were doing this right there'd be a stoning. I may have misunderstood, but I don't see him arguing that the law was ignored completely.
 
andrew said:
I think Samuel's point was simply that there were exceptions to the rule, in response to Zec's assertion that if we were doing this right there'd be a stoning. I may have misunderstood, but I don't see him arguing that the law was ignored completely.
Click to expand...
Sounds reasonable. I'll let him clarify. In the meantime, I'll just relax on this lazy Saturday:)
 
Although it had absolutely nothing to do with adultery, we do have a stoning recorded.
The fact Stephen was stoned so easily proves to me that it was not an uncommon occurrence.

Possibly the issue is authority.
Who would authorize the stoning of a king?
Who, besides the King, would authorize the stoning of Absolom?
Who would authorize the stoning of a prophet's wife?
Were the men bringing the woman to Rabbi Yeshua in order to get authorization to stone her, testing him at the same time?
 
To clarify:
The law was given, presumably because God intended it to be followed. We do not have evidence that it was completely ignored, it may have been followed in cases we are not told about.

However we also have no evidence it was ever followed either. I do find it very interesting that there is not a single example of anyone actually applying this law, but many of it not being applied.

Also, when YHWH punishes Israel for adultery prophetically, He puts her away, doesn't utterly destroy her - again the punishment is inconsistent.

I am just repeating the facts I see in scripture. I don't know what to make of it, but am simply wondering. Is there an apocryphal example of this law being applied?
 
Last edited:
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

If a person was stoned for adultery in ancient Israel, and nobody was around to record it, does it mean it never happened?

This is probably a whole new topic, but regardless, I'm staying away from it.
 
FollowingHim said:
Case study to ponder: Would it have been right for Abigail to divorce David for his adultery with Bathsheba? Or did this have nothing to do with Abigail, was it between David, Bathsheba, Uriah and God?
Click to expand...

Thanks everyone for answering my question.

But what I'm more concerned about is, if a husband committed adultery, according to the worldly view, the wife will be angry because her husband was not loyal to her. But from the biblical perspective, did this really has nothing to do with his wife? What should his wife react to the fact of his husband's sins?
 
Technically only a sin if other woman was married.

If other woman was single, he is obligated to marry her.

That is a strict OT (Torah) interpretation of things. Is the husband smart for doing it? Not really. Is he prepared to support this other woman? What about a child produced?

There are threads on here discussing the "mistress" concept and how common it has been for many, many years.
 
MichaelZ said:
But what I'm more concerned about is, if a husband committed adultery, according to the worldly view, the wife will be angry because her husband was not loyal to her. But from the biblical perspective, did this really has nothing to do with his wife? What should his wife react to the fact of his husband's sins?
Click to expand...
My answer to the question I think you're asking is:

It's not that it would have nothing to do with his wife. It's still a sin, and in the Kingdom of Israel, a capital crime. But the Israelite wife would (or should) have the same emotional reaction she would have to her husband committing a murder or treason or some other capital crime, without the additional overtones of betrayal, "infidelity", and sexual possessiveness that the modern worldly woman deals with (which for the modern worldly woman are going to be the only issue, since adultery today is typically either not a crime or not enforced as a crime).
 
andrew said:
My answer to the question I think you're asking is:

It's not that it would have nothing to do with his wife. It's still a sin, and in the Kingdom of Israel, a capital crime. But the Israelite wife would (or should) have the same emotional reaction she would have to her husband committing a murder or treason or some other capital crime, without the additional overtones of betrayal, "infidelity", and sexual possessiveness that the modern worldly woman deals with (which for the modern worldly woman are going to be the only issue, since adultery today is typically either not a crime or not enforced as a crime).
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's the ownership/exclusivity angle that this society has adopted that is the most serious concern.
 
andrew said:
My answer to the question I think you're asking is:

It's not that it would have nothing to do with his wife. It's still a sin, and in the Kingdom of Israel, a capital crime. But the Israelite wife would (or should) have the same emotional reaction she would have to her husband committing a murder or treason or some other capital crime, without the additional overtones of betrayal, "infidelity", and sexual possessiveness that the modern worldly woman deals with (which for the modern worldly woman are going to be the only issue, since adultery today is typically either not a crime or not enforced as a crime).
Click to expand...

Thanks. That was what I want to ask and I got the answer. Sorry for my bad English :)
 
Let me see if I understand this....my ex had sex with an unwed women then he should marry her also? And have two wives? I would have been ok with that had he told me that was what he wanted. He just couldn't keep it in his pants. He would have had a hundred women if he could.
I would have loved to have another women to talk to.
 
Many families are destroyed because they believe "there must be only one" (in this case, only one wife), while if they realized there were other options that would work for everyone, they could have worked it out. Having trouble keeping it in your pants is a terrible, terrible reason to have multiple wives, but somewhere in there there might have been a solution if your husband could have had some input from someone that could point him toward different options (including a different view of sex and a little self-control).
 
jacobhaivri said:
Also, there is the case of Mary's presumed infidelity. Joseph wanted to put her away quietly.
Click to expand...

This is one part of the record of Christ's birth that I really love. This was Joseph's big test: IF he had enforced the law rigorously, THEN he would never have been the guardian of the Son of God.

2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
 
ValleyVA said:
Let me see if I understand this....my ex had sex with an unwed women then he should marry her also? And have two wives? I would have been ok with that had he told me that was what he wanted. He just couldn't keep it in his pants. He would have had a hundred women if he could.
I would have loved to have another women to talk to.
Click to expand...
In general, yes, that is AN answer. However, there are more dynamics involved in a poly relationship. The husbands ability to be faithful within covenant with however many wives he has, has a direct correlation to the success of his family.
Our focus here is on helping families be successful whether they have one wife or several.
If he's making 'mistakes ' as he's moving towards greater responsibility, that's one thing and understandable in our cultural void of poly experience.
If he's deliberately breaking covenant for the sake of the lusts of his heart or conquests, that's quite another story. This type of a man will not make a good husband to any number of women, one or one hundred.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top