• 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.

Does Yehovah really hate divorce? An alternative perspective

ZecAustin said:
The question is can she remarry
Click to expand...
Just going to throw this out there.
Is it Biblically supportable for a woman under the age of 60 to be single?
After she has left her fathers house and with this exception:
1 Corinthians 7:11 (KJV)
But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to [her] husband: and let not the husband put away [his] wife.
 
Last edited:
The book talks about rules around marriage but I don't see where it says that all women, nor any subset of them, are all to be married.

If that were part of the book's overall message I don't think we'd have to puzzle over it.
 
Genesis 2:18 (KJV)
And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

Genesis 2:20 (KJV)
And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

As un-PC as it may sound, there is a stated purpose for the existence of women.
Assuming that she is to be an independent agent is a mistake.

Isaiah 4:1 (KJV)
And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.

It is a reproach (shame) for a woman to be single.
People gonna hate me, but nothing else is supported Scripturally.
 
Not trying to derail this thread, but the idea that a woman can divorce and remain single isn’t in Scripture.
 
Verifyveritas76 said:
Vows matter. Regardless of if it’s the vow you make that convinces her to accept your proposal or the vow she makes when she accepts you as husband. IMO, it’s hypocritical to cherrypick the vows that bind either to the marriage and expect the other to keep them when the vows that created the marriage aren’t being kept.
Click to expand...

If the breaking of vows is justification for divorce then there are few marriages indeed that couldn't be broken by that standard.
 
rockfox said:
If the breaking of vows is justification for divorce then there are few marriages indeed that couldn't be broken by that standard.
Click to expand...

Which is a good argument for verrry limited vows such as the covering, provision and marital duties. These are so very simple and so very basic that even a very low performing male should have no issue fulfilling these and keeping his family intact.

If he’s foolish enough to promise her a mansion, sports car and the very best life the vow is on him as well as the covenant breaking when he fails to perform.
 
steve said:
Just going to throw this out there.
Is it Biblically supportable for a woman under the age of 60 to be single?
After she has left her fathers house and with this exception:
1 Corinthians 7:11 (KJV)
But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to [her] husband: and let not the husband put away [his] wife.
Click to expand...
Intellesssting!!!! I had never thought about it from this angle. Is singleness even allowed?
 
steve said:
Not trying to derail this thread, but the idea that a woman can divorce and remain single isn’t in Scripture.
Click to expand...
You're not saying that woman who leaves her husband is required to remarry right? I think you just listed that exception in a different post.
 
ZecAustin said:
You're not saying that woman who leaves her husband is required to remarry right? I think you just listed that exception in a different post.
Click to expand...
Right, I think that the focus is on repairing the relationship.
A divorce paper changes the situation.
 
ZecAustin said:
Is singleness even allowed?
Click to expand...
Other than for the elderly, I can’t find it as an option in Scripture.
We are talking about women here, if a male cannot attract a woman, that’s his problem. He is not in rebellion to YHWH’s plan.

Psalm 68:6 (KJV)
God setteth the solitary in families: he bringeth out those which are bound with chains: but the rebellious dwell in a dry [land].
 
Last edited:
I ran across something today in the Babylonian Talmud that basically defined the woman that was expected to reconcile by calling her “a woman divorced, but not divorced”. She was only free when her husband died, but he was obligated to maintain her in his house. It seemed fairly clear that this was a woman of a different status than one that had a writing of divorce along with all that that entailed.
 
Verifyveritas76 said:
“a woman divorced, but not divorced”.
Click to expand...
I read somewhere the this is what happened to Michal, after she berated King David for dancing before the Ark as it was being delivered.
She is not mentioned again and no progeny was listed from her.
Supported, but not ever treated again as a wife.
 
It’s also worth mentioning that the status of widowhood in Isaiah 54:4 was specifically spoken to the desolate woman in verse 1 that apparently had been abandoned or divorced and refused though her husband wasn’t dead.

This is an aspect that I think has much depth to explore and much to learn about. Wouldn’t the status of widow indicate that she wasn’t bound to the man who forsook her?
 
steve said:
Other than for the elderly, I can’t find it as an option in Scripture.
Click to expand...

I would say its a possibility, but not the preference. Perhaps it would be better to say that all women were intended to have a covering whether its their father or husband. God did provide the civil and familial structure to ensure that they were all taken care of. In the Old Testament, its the blood brother to her deceased husband unless he divorced her. In the New Testament its the Blood Brother to her deceased husband (I’m not sure about the divorced aspect there but it may be as well)

Obviously, the rebellious dwell in a dry or desolate land.
 
steve said:
...
Is it Biblically supportable for a woman under the age of 60 to be single?
After she has left her fathers house and with this exception:
1 Corinthians 7:11 (KJV)
But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to [her] husband: and let not the husband put away [his] wife.
Click to expand...

ZecAustin said:
...The point though is that this debate isn't about protecting our precious daughters from their evil abusive husbands. It's about the ability of a woman to remarry. That changes the whole conversation. That topic is addressed directly and we've gone the rounds on it and no one's mind was changed.

But of course a woman can leave an abusive husband. The question is can she remarry.
Click to expand...
From the Jewish perspective you have competing commands here.
The abuse causes an issue of "pikuach nefesh" - life-risk. Almost any commandment can be broken to preserve life made in the image of G-d.
So divorce is allowed (as we seem to agree).

Now since her divorce was based on life risk she's free to remarry. The very bond/vows/whatever bound her to her husband are null by reason of "life risk".

Now she's free, as the @steve was asking "is she allowed to remain single?"
For this we have to consider the command to "piru u'revu" "be fruitful and become numerous".
If the woman has not had at least 1 boy and 1 girl (11 boys and zero girls doesn't count) then she has not fulfilled the "piru u'revu" commandment and she must remarry if at all possible.

If she has a kid of each sex then she has options and is not required to remarry.

"I came that they may have life and have it more abundantly" -Yeshua
 
IshChayil said:
From the Jewish perspective you have competing commands here.
The abuse causes an issue of "pikuach nefesh" - life-risk. Almost any commandment can be broken to preserve life made in the image of G-d.
So divorce is allowed (as we seem to agree).

Now since her divorce was based on life risk she's free to remarry. The very bond/vows/whatever bound her to her husband are null by reason of "life risk".

Now she's free, as the @steve was asking "is she allowed to remain single?"
For this we have to consider the command to "piru u'revu" "be fruitful and become numerous".
If the woman has not had at least 1 boy and 1 girl (11 boys and zero girls doesn't count) then she has not fulfilled the "piru u'revu" commandment and she must remarry if at all possible.

If she has a kid of each sex then she has options and is not required to remarry.

"I came that they may have life and have it more abundantly" -Yeshua
Click to expand...

THIS is verrrry interesting and complementary to other things I’ve been finding.

If you have references for this id appreciate them.
 
IshChayil said:
The abuse causes an issue of "pikuach nefesh" - life-risk. Almost any commandment can be broken to preserve life made in the image of G-d.
So divorce is allowed (as we seem to agree).
Click to expand...

Something tells me "life-risk" is a little more serious a standard than that modern 'he said something mean to me' definition of abuse we operate under today.

ZecAustin said:
Intellesssting!!!! I had never thought about it from this angle. Is singleness even allowed?
Click to expand...

IshChayil said:
For this we have to consider the command to "piru u'revu" "be fruitful and become numerous".
If the woman has not had at least 1 boy and 1 girl (11 boys and zero girls doesn't count) then she has not fulfilled the "piru u'revu" commandment and she must remarry if at all possible.
Click to expand...

1 Tim 2:15...

Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
Click to expand...
 
1 Tim 5:11-15 also speaks to the question of widows and also (by implication) of single women...

But refuse to put younger widows on the list, for when they feel sensual desires in disregard of Christ, they want to get married, thus incurring condemnation, because they have set aside their previous pledge. At the same time they also learn to be idle, as they go around from house to house; and not merely idle, but also gossips and busybodies, talking about things not proper to mention. Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house, and give the enemy no occasion for reproach; for some have already turned aside to follow Satan.
Click to expand...

That is only talking about widows, but what about the implication for singles?

What Paul describes sounds exactly like the behavior we commonly see amoung single unmarrieds as well. Which exposes the cultural assumption's of Paul's time that a) unmarrieds lived at home and b) their fathers kept them under control lest they give in to these same sins of idleness. That this is only spoken of about widows shows singles weren't a problem, or these same things would have been said of them too. But widow's were because post death of the husband, they default to not having a head over them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top