• 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.

Divorced women and married men

CecilW

CecilW

Member
Real Person
Male
The specific purpose of a writ of divorcement was so that she COULD remarry.

Whether the divorce SHOULD have happened or not, it did.

We focus a lot on the very narrow valid reasons for a man to divorce his wife -- basically sexual infidelity, but often forget that Torah also had laws governing the woman's rights, including the right to leave.

If a couple have merely separated because they could not get along, yes, they should work that out. Paul is clear on this.

But he doesn't supersede Torah, where God made it plain that if she is divorced she may remarry.

Start from the heart of God. He has compassion on her as much as every other woman in church. And His pronouncements that she is created FOR man, and it is not good to be alone, apply just as much to her as to anyone else.

Take it from there. :)
 
Matthew 5:27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.
31 “Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery."

How would this NT passage compare to the OT Law? It would seem that marrying a divorced woman (He doesn't state any exceptions) would be committing adultery. I am not seeking to judge others on interpretation here, but rather truly seeking God's desire for this woman we know. I would think that there must be a way for her to be protected and be under the headship of a man. How then would this play out for her protection and spiritual headship, unless the husband were to believe and do as he is commanded? Is the woman protected by God in this circumstance or is there other teaching we need to consider? Surely the words of Jesus are authoritative, so long as we understand them properly.
 
Not sure if this is related but in the Law if a man was found committing adultery, he and the woman would both be stoned to death, not divorced. Guess that would free the wife to marry.... :oops: :o
 
I see one scenario that has positive benefit on a few fronts. The men of the church pray fervently for the (ex) husband and when he is saved, they reconcile under a new covenant before God. This reconciles the woman, sees new life for the man, and edifies the church as they all labor together and see the fruit of their labors and obedience. Call me crazy, but this is what I am praying for.
 
Cow fam said:
31 “Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery."

How would this NT passage compare to the OT Law?
Click to expand...

The difficulty is in the translation. Bill Luck, former BF member, lecturer, professor, and scholar, explains it weel here:http://bible.org/series/divorce-and-re-marriage-recovering-biblical-view

The site is also referenced on our "Resources | Books & Links" page, toward the bottom. I heartily recommend it, and suspect it will answer your questions pretty definitively.
 
CecilW said:
The specific purpose of a writ of divorcement was so that she COULD remarry.

Whether the divorce SHOULD have happened or not, it did.
Click to expand...
Very good position Cecil, I've never looked at it quite that way, but I do agree with you.
We focus a lot on the very narrow valid reasons for a man to divorce his wife -- basically sexual infidelity, but often forget that Torah also had laws governing the woman's rights, including the right to leave.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify on this one though, the Torah laws around a women's right to leave were extremely narrow, and basically said she could leave her husband only if he had already abandoned her for a second wife. While the NT is clear that "a wife should not divorce her husband". Could you clarify where you are reading a woman's right to leave in the Torah? This does not at all invalidate your first point that the divorce has happened anyway of course.
 
FollowingHim said:
the Torah laws around a women's right to leave were extremely narrow, and basically said she could leave her husband only if he had already abandoned her for a second wife. While the NT is clear that "a wife should not divorce her husband". Could you clarify where you are reading a woman's right to leave in the Torah? This does not at all invalidate your first point that the divorce has happened anyway of course.
Click to expand...

It is an inference on my part, admittedly. But I refuse to believe that I am more compassionate than God.

A slave could leave if mistreated by the master. If they ran away due to abuse, they were NOT to be returned. Is God less compassionate towards wives than slaves? Is one who leaves due to abuse by a husband who then refuses to divorce her out of a determination to control what is his doomed to a life of solitude, making her living however possible (in many cultures meaning prostitution)?

I have read but cannot verify that the rabbis interpreted Ex 21:10-11 as applying to all marriages, not just where a second took place. *shrug*

I will readily admit that I have heard too many cries of "He's abusive" that turned out to be nothing more than "I didn't always get my way, and didn't LIKE having to submit to an authority." But I have also seen too many cases of actual abuse, including attempted murder.

If I had a boss who abused me, I would change employment. If I had a god whose rulership was leading me towards death, I'd change gods -- oh wait! I DID that! ;) It follows that if a husband's husbanding is moving a woman closer to death, rather than life, she might well have cause to change.

One way of interpreting that makes sense to me is that sometimes Torah statements set a minimum standard. With that view, Ex 21:11 would be interpreted as, If he even diminishes her food, clothes, or marital access, much less does worse, she can split.

There is a well known form of abuse called Spiritual Abuse, in which the abusers use the Bible as a moral club to keep their victims compliant under really awful treatment. I cannot believe that to have been God's intent. Man threatens his pregnant wife and small child with a gun, then gets the pastor to claim it was her moral duty to "GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE"? Happened to someone VERY close to me.

To the contrary, I think that you will find in Bill Luck's book that even the OT laws on divorce were intended to protect the women, as well as promote reconciliation where possible.

But when a man tries to drown his wife in the bathtub in front of her 8 yr old daughter, I pretty much figure she should get shut of him first, and seek scripture later. (Happened to a friend.) If that disqualifies me from doctrinal correctness, so be it!
 
I'm not at all comfortable with taking our own morality and pushing it on God, along the lines of "I refuse to believe that I am more compassionate than God". That's a dangerous line of thinking, because then you could start saying "I wouldn't order the deaths of thousands of people, so everyone in the Old Testament who went to war for God must have been disobeying Him, as He is too nice for that". God's ways are more complicated than ours.
 
The appeal to how God thinks was merely intended to suggest that God's mercy had to be in there somewhere, and I just don't easily see it.

As to his having them kill off whole cities and tribes, remember what he told Abraham (I think), that his descendants would serve 400 or so years in Egypt. Why? Because the people of the land of canaan had not yet filled their cup of iniquity to the point where God could not avoid passing judgment upon them.

So even the Jews' years of servitude in Egypt stemmed from God's mercy and reluctance to pass judgment on the inhabitants of Canaan. Probably worth remembering when considering their final fate. I do know that in Torah, there are a number of places where God reminds them to deal kindly with the foreigners and slaves among them, and to remember that they were also at one time slaves in a strange land.

So what I'm really trying to say is that His compassion IS there, even if not prominently displayed in every verse.
 
CecilW said:
The appeal to how God thinks was merely intended to suggest that God's mercy had to be in there somewhere, and I just don';t easily see it.
Click to expand...
I agree with this thought, His mercy will be there. I'm just trying to find it in the text so we know exactly how He chooses to apply His mercy to this situation.
 
FollowingHim said:
CecilW said:
I'm just trying to find it in the text so we know exactly how He chooses to apply His mercy to this situation.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Jesus conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well satisfies me.

He didn't say, "You had 1 husband and 5 adulterous relationships. Repent and skeedaddle back to your one husband."

Instead, He said, "You've had 5 husbands, and the guy you're with now hasn't bothered to marry you." (Cecil's Paraphrase) ;)

Works for me.
 
In the OT Jacob had 4 wives right..... Wrong he had 2 wives and 2 slaves, they both appeared to be playing the same role. What was different about the slaves. Hebrew cultural class systems of the time. I do not believe that slavery was commanded by God persay but rather a part of the culture of the day. Not dissimilar then me wearing a baseball cap with a dress it's a matter of cultural norms. Jacobs slaves in particular were givin separately by each woman serving as concubines for the ladies. Seeing as how they didn't have the material things of our time instead of coveting each others sports cars they wanted to be the ones with the most children. LOL some of that stuff just makes me laugh. I do not want to emulate the ancient Hebrew culture. Where to draw the lines concerning Gods decrees, cultural norms and the meaning of Jesus' new covering is very interesting. The opinions on these issues have been creating, breaking, and rebuilding denominations for years. But I digress. If I look at the communication between god and Abram's slave/wife Hagar I see great compassion. The first time Sari sends Hagar away an angle of the lord instructs her to "go back and serve them" The next time Sarah sends her away an angel of God says " why do you cry god will make your descendants more numours than the stars" I can see that god has great compassion, and understanding. He does not say to Abrham, you must keep your wife for ever regardless of the unbearable tension with your wife. Now that I think I've shown gods character of compassion in marriage/divorce. I'm still back to square one; is a divorced woman to remain unmarried forever. In the OT if a man married a divorced woman he had to leave the city. At one point God spoke to the priests, Aarons sons, and instructed them not to marry divorced woman or prostitutes. Now we can jump forward to Hosea and see god instructing a man to marry a prostitute. Hold on did God ask Hosea to sin, never God can not sin. Perhaps what God has told one people group does not necessarily apply to another. And what people did culturally in the OT was necessarily comanded or condemned by God.
 
CecilW said:
Jesus conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well satisfies me.

He didn't say, "You had 1 husband and 5 adulterous relationships. Repent and skeedaddle back to your one husband."

Instead, He said, "You've had 5 husbands, and the guy you're with now hasn't bothered to marry you." (Cecil's Paraphrase) :?:

Works for me.
Click to expand...
That backs up your point that whether or not it should have happened, she is now divorced and can remarry, which I certainly agree with you on. Another excellent illustration of this. It doesn't say it was ok for her to leave the earlier ones (we have no idea who instigated the divorces anyway), it just says that what's done is done and you can move on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top