• 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.

Men Committing Adultery

I agree with Zec, however I would add that as far as I can see, if they have obtained a paper divorce, signed by the husband, then she is free. This would in my mind constitute a biblical certificate of divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1). The wife has no scriptural authority to divorce her husband on her account, as Zec points out this is a very hard teaching but is there whether we like it or not. However if he signs a piece of paper saying that he releases her, then she is free (although if she gets a paper divorce recognised legally, but without his agreement, she is still his wife - the key is whether he has decided to release her). The circumstances leading to that will always be messy, and there may be improper behaviour on both sides, but ultimately if he chooses to divorce her she is divorced (justly or unjustly), and if he chooses not to divorce her she's still his wife.
 
ZecAustin said:
There is no provision for a Christian woman to leave her husband and remarry. If his behavior is so egregious that she can't live with him then she is to remain single during his lifetime or be reconciled to him. Not read that carefully, a Christian wife can leave an abusive husband but she can't remarry. It's a hard thing to hear but you have to invent a lot of scripture to directly controvert some very simple and direct Scripture to come up with any other conclusion.
Click to expand...


Invent.... or interpret, translate, contextualize, apply historically, and overall exegesize?

I think I know all of the verses of which you are basing this on, but would like to see where you get your bulk interpretation from, in case I am wrong. No need to copy/paste whole verses, just references.

Now you say that a debauched and non-providing husband can be left, but without remarriage. What provisions for protection and financial support would this woman have if say she had 5 young children? The husband wasn't providing to begin with, was abusive, and drank away what they had already.

Welfare? Commune? Begging?
 
Last edited:
FollowingHim said:
I agree with Zec, however I would add that as far as I can see, if they have obtained a paper divorce, signed by the husband, then she is free. This would in my mind constitute a biblical certificate of divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1). The wife has no scriptural authority to divorce her husband on her account, as Zec points out this is a very hard teaching but is there whether we like it or not. However if he signs a piece of paper saying that he releases her, then she is free (although if she gets a paper divorce recognised legally, but without his agreement, she is still his wife - the key is whether he has decided to release her). The circumstances leading to that will always be messy, and there may be improper behaviour on both sides, but ultimately if he chooses to divorce her she is divorced (justly or unjustly), and if he chooses not to divorce her she's still his wife.
Click to expand...


I see the possibility of your position in scripture for a "covenanted" marriage..But I think this answer strayed from the original point. This question arose after I hypothesized a female in a "non-covenant" relationship only bonded by sex. Zec says they are married nonetheless, regardless of whether she agreed to be bonded by covenant by virtue of engaging in intercourse. Do you feel this "paper" divorce is necessary under those circumstance?
 
Mojo said:
What if said woman has no father to refuse or accept a claim by one of her partners (past or present) and no older male next of kin to advocate for her? Is she allowed to accept or reject such claims and move on?
Click to expand...

You didn't address this.
 
Mojo said:
This question arose after I hypothesized a female in a "non-covenant" relationship only bonded by sex. Zec says they are married nonetheless, regardless of whether she agreed to be bonded by covenant by virtue of engaging in intercourse. Do you feel this "paper" divorce is necessary under those circumstance?
Click to expand...
Strictly literally speaking, he is supposed to give her something in writing. However as far as I can see the purpose of this would be to formally close off any previous contractual arrangements so she can demonstrate that any paper marriage contract is now void evidenced by this second piece of paper. If a husband wrote down nothing when entering the marriage, I can't see him actually writing anything down to end it.
The paperwork is evidence of intent. It shows that the husband has made a conscious decision to divorce his wife. If this intent is very clearly expressed without paperwork, surely that would suffice?
For instance, if you rang up the former husband on the telephone, said "is this your wife" and he said "no, certainly not, I never want to see her again", I would personally think that would be sufficient evidence to demonstrate his conscious decision to divorce her.
Remembering too that paperwork was more necessary back when we had no telephones.
 
The reason I suggest a phone call is that anyone can claim anything when you hear only one side of the story. A woman might claim to be completely legitimately divorced and free to marry you. But how do you know that is true? Maybe she ran away from the last husband herself, and there is a whole other side to the story you really should know before taking her on as your own wife.
A written document signed by the husband is firm evidence that she is truly divorced. So is a personal discussion with the husband himself (by phone, email, whatever).
You never know, a background check might turn out to be far more important than you initially expected.
 
Luke 16:18

"“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery."

I am not seeing where paperwork makes any difference.
 
Asforme&myhouse said:
Luke 16:18

"“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery."

I am not seeing where paperwork makes any difference.
Click to expand...

There's an interesting take on this in the article in this thread. In summary, the author claims the verse should actually read, "Whoever puts away his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is put away from her husband commits adultery."

The point being that there is a different word for put away and divorce, and this is actually speaking of marrying women who weren't properly divorced. To be sure, I am not convinced of the argument yet - I need to study it out more, but the point has enough merit it is worth studying out.
 
I find it hard to believe that Jesus was just telling them to get their paperwork in order. He seems to be referring to the reason that they are separating from their wives, not technicalities in legal process.
 
Asforme&myhouse said:
I find it hard to believe that Jesus was just telling them to get their paperwork in order. He seems to be referring to the reason that they are separating from their wives, not technicalities in legal process.
Click to expand...

My views on this have changed a bit, over the years. I agree, that hardness of hearts is being addressed as the cause behind most divorces. But I don't see requiring a bill, or certificate of divorce as a mere technicality. Jesus was affirming the righteous standard that YHWH set.

I see YHWH's allowance of divorce as perfect, and merciful. Woman was created to be a suitable helper for the man, and it is in the nature of many to want very much to please the husband. Some men are not happy with their wives. They really can do nothing right (find no favor in his eyes). For him to keep her, when his attitude says constantly that she is unsuitable, can only be pride, or selfishness, to my way of thinking. The law seems to instruct such men to give her a divorce, and a chance at finding a husband she can please (is suited for, as "help meet" means suitable helper)
For a woman to be bound with no recourse to such an ungrateful man, would be worse then Biblical slavery, as slaves could run away from their masters, and were NOT to be returned. If God didn't require slaves to stay in bad situations, I cannot believe He intended wives to be abused like "slaves with benifits" (if you all get my meaning).
If the law said that a properly divorced woman was free to remarry, God meant it, and as long as sin is a choice man can make, divorce might, in some cases, be a very satisfactory solution.

It may be too, as earlier posters, and this thread's title suggest, that men divorcing their wives unjustly were commiting adultery, by causing what was supposed to be their wife/household/family to become part of another man's house. It's interesting food for thought (and study).
 
I like this reply Jolene. I too have changed the more I study not just the Law, but God's intents behind those laws. I see God as being mindful of his female followers so much more than we think. What some see as male centric chauvinism may actually become seen as quite the opposite.

Again, I go back to the "sex means marriage" issue. It's used almost like a brand upon a woman. I sexed you, so now you are mine...FOREVER! What about responsibility on the male? I can't speak for God, but I feel like he didn't have to give extreme details on how to treat wives because it would have been known and expected. He gave laws on how to treat slaves. Would he expect less for wives? I think not. Even Slaves were given a choice to leave after a period, or stay as part of the family iirc.

Could we interpret not find favor as "not be treated favorably"? I'm not talking literal Hebrew, just in practicality. "If you can't figure out how to treat her favorably...let her go to find it elsewhere." Rabbi Saul (Paul) studied the law more than we can ever hope to. Even he had to remind husbands about treating wives properly.

Was Jesus saying "hardness of their hearts" as in "you begged for it as an easy out of your marriages" or "it had to be changed from what I originally intended because it was necessary because you forgot proper treatment and conduct in marriage because of your sin (hardened hearts)."

Haven't developed a firm doctrine on this...just open thinking.

I feel this applies to the Uncovenanted single woman who chooses to leave an unworthy beau who she had physical knowledge of, but not in covenant.
 
Asforme&myhouse said:
I find it hard to believe that Jesus was just telling them to get their paperwork in order. He seems to be referring to the reason that they are separating from their wives, not technicalities in legal process.
Click to expand...

If you haven't already, I encourage you to read the article with a concordance nearby. Like I said in my previous post, I am not fully sold on this yet, but the case is pretty compelling when you read the author's analysis and see what the words actually mean in the Bible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top