|
Post by degem on May 1, 2008 8:42:20 GMT -5
I know of a situation where both husband and wife were professing. Said husband was found cheating by wife. The couple then divorced. She was remarried to a professing man and they have children. A very happy marriage! They have an open home. I know this couple very personally and I love them with all my heart. I won't even pretend that I understand the whys and wherefores of divorce and remarriage. In this particular case I think divorce should have been allowed. I don't know all the personal details of what entailed with the divorce and quite frankly its none of my business. But I feel that there are situations which entails a divorce. It is very easy for others to look at a marriage and judge/give their opinions on what the couple should do/shouldn't do. Well, we aren't the ones in that marriage so how do we know, as those looking from the outside, what is truly going on on the inside of that marriage?
|
|
|
Post by TRUTHTELLER on May 1, 2008 9:02:20 GMT -5
Nice post GEM-----I agree I knew/and know of a few professing marriages in which the couples are miserable as they can be and do not want to get divorced because, well, we all know why. IMO, it seems like the marriage would feel like a lie or a fraud. ?? My aunt and uncle who were both professing and had marriage problems, stayed together until their children were grown and out on their own. They then decided to divorce, of course it was a mess. Anyway a worker ask my aunt-----What about your marriage vow-----"UNTIL DEATH DO US PART"-----Her reply was that "DEATH DO US PART!!!!! THE DEATH OF OUR MARRIAGE." Nothing else was said.
|
|
|
Post by degem on May 1, 2008 9:14:35 GMT -5
Thanks Truthteller! I like your aunt's spunky reply! Good for her!! Gem
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 16:04:54 GMT -5
You're saying that believing the words of Jesus and encouraging others to follow them is judgmental? He is Lord.
[edit: and -> of]
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 16:07:06 GMT -5
I knew/and know of a few professing marriages in which the couples are miserable as they can be and do not want to get divorced because, well, we all know why. IMO, it seems like the marriage would feel like a lie or a fraud. ?? Because they know it's morally wrong and they want to obey their Lord, hopefully. In that much they are right, but they are wrong to keep it a fraud or to think that they must stay miserable.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 16:13:46 GMT -5
You have failed to factor in "the mercy of God" without which none of us have a hope of salvation because none of us can stand in the light of God's laws. You have made a serious oversight here, on the one point which actually matters. Those that have truly felt the mercy of God will know what I'm talking about. It transcends his laws to which he alone is not subject to. Therefore, in judgement he appropriates his mercy to those who seek him. If God is merciful towards a divorcee or person who has re-married, their past sins are forgotten. I said nothing contrary to that. Please do not twist my words in order to make your point. I have not failed to factor in the mercy of God. I am saddened by your post as well, since you seem to imply that it is acceptable to sin, as long as we can get forgiveness for it later. Jesus said "if you love me, you will obey my commandments". If a divorced person loves Jesus, how could he choose to get re-married, when Jesus specifically said that to do so would be adultery and adultery is forbidden by God? I am not talking about forgiveness *after* a sin, because that is not what the purpose of this thread was -- that is not the position the original poster is in. I am talking about willingness to knowingly commit a sin, which is clearly wrong.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 16:16:16 GMT -5
Thanks Truthteller! I like your aunt's spunky reply! Good for her!! Gem Willingness to throw out the word of God is not good for her, Gem. It's tragic.
|
|
|
Post by whuh on May 1, 2008 16:22:11 GMT -5
Thanks Truthteller! I like your aunt's spunky reply! Good for her!! Gem Willingness to throw out the word of God is not good for her, Gem. It's tragic. ??and "UNTIL DEATH DO UP PART" is found where? ?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 16:31:08 GMT -5
??and "UNTIL DEATH DO UP PART" is found where? ? In her own vow, for one thing. The Bible is clear on divorce and it is also clear that marriage ends at death -- the death of one of the two married, not some abstract "death of the marriage". The woman involved clearly twisted the words into something they never were meant to mean, in order to justify her sins to herself and/or others. God is not fooled, even when we lie to ourselves.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2008 16:37:13 GMT -5
You have failed to factor in "the mercy of God" without which none of us have a hope of salvation because none of us can stand in the light of God's laws. You have made a serious oversight here, on the one point which actually matters. Those that have truly felt the mercy of God will know what I'm talking about. It transcends his laws to which he alone is not subject to. Therefore, in judgement he appropriates his mercy to those who seek him. If God is merciful towards a divorcee or person who has re-married, their past sins are forgotten. I said nothing contrary to that. Please do not twist my words in order to make your point. I have not failed to factor in the mercy of God. I am saddened by your post as well, since you seem to imply that it is acceptable to sin, as long as we can get forgiveness for it later. Jesus said "if you love me, you will obey my commandments". If a divorced person loves Jesus, how could he choose to get re-married, when Jesus specifically said that to do so would be adultery and adultery is forbidden by God? I am not talking about forgiveness *after* a sin, because that is not what the purpose of this thread was -- that is not the position the original poster is in. I am talking about willingness to knowingly commit a sin, which is clearly wrong. CUL, Why is it when hardened 2x2-ers are pointed to the boundless, unmeasurable love and mercy of God, they equate this to "licence to sin !" I can assure you that I do not see it as a licence to sin. Perhaps you do not understand what mercy is ? Consider the woman at the well. Five times married, four times divorced and re-married, perhaps only put away by her fifth husband and forced into adultery by taking a sixth partner due to her fifth husband not divorcing her, yet did she or did she not receive MERCY from Jesus ? Did Jesus make any specific command as to whether it was all right to divorce and re-marry before receiving him but not so afterwards ? Did Jesus make any commands to that woman at the well regarding her circumstances, which I may add, he used to show her he was the Christ ? Did she not feel his mercy ? Insomuch as ye gave a cup of water to these the least of my children, you did it unto me ! This licence to sin misrepresentation is nothing more than a licence to deny the mercy of God.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 16:46:55 GMT -5
Blah, blah, anti-"2x2" propaganda. I know nothing about "hardened 2x2ers", so I can't tell you how or why they behave or believe what they do. Why is it that you assume that because a belief is associated, in your mind at least, with this "2x2ism", that it must not come from God? Apparently you had this bias before you read my post and thus decided to categorize me in such a way as to allow yourself to ignore my position and its Biblical basis.
You are wrong that this is about the mercy of God. I will say it again: in this case we are not talking about the mercy of God to forgive the sins of a repentant sinner. I have in no way denied such.
What we are talking about, and what is clearly unjustifiable, is a married person seeking justification for the decision to divorce, or a divorced person seeking justification to sinfully re-marry, based on his own emotions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2008 17:04:08 GMT -5
Okay CUL. I am not raising any arguments about what God's laws are regarding divorce and remarriage. However, the fulfillment of his laws are in his mercy, something which we are all dependant upon ultimately, not abiding by his laws as the Pharisees tried repeatedly to argue about and attempt to entrap Jesus with.
God's laws tell us that "Thou shalt not kill (commit murder)." The Bible also tells us that murderers will not inherit the Kingdom of God. That is God's standards. Yet we DO know that some murderers will inherit the Kingdom of God, e.g. King David (who was an adulterer as well).
Now if it is possible for a murderer to abtain God's mercy, which seems contrary to God's laws, why not someone who is divorced and re-married ?
A deceased person cannot be brought back to life to undo the evil deed.
By your understanding a man has more chance of receiving the mercy of God if he murders his wife than if he merely divorces her and then marries another ?
a) Man murders wife, repents, receives mercy and salvation.
b) Man divorces wife, re-marries another, repents of sin, receives no mercy or salvation ?
You have not satisfactorily addressed the question of the woman at the well who had been married five times and was living with a sixth man unto whom she was not married (but still in a relationship with), yet she received the mercy of Jesus. Please try and explain Jesus in this scenario !
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 17:06:37 GMT -5
God's laws tell us that "Thou shalt not kill (commit murder)." The Bible also tells us that murderers will not inherit the Kingdom of God. That is God's standards. Yet we DO know that some murderers will inherit the Kingdom of God, e.g. King David (who was an adulterer as well). Someone who has repented and does not continue murdering is no longer a murderer. And of course I never said someone who is divorced and re-married cannot obtain God's mercy. Again, you're changing the question. That is not my understanding. See above and other posts. Jesus did not tell her it was acceptable to continue living with the man to whom she was not married. He in no way contradicted what He said in other places, which I have quoted or referred to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2008 17:15:58 GMT -5
Now if it is possible for a murderer to abtain God's mercy, which seems contrary to God's laws, why not someone who is divorced and re-married ?
And of course I never said someone who is divorced and re-married cannot obtain God's mercy. Again, you're changing the question.
I'm sorry, but I thought you were arguing about this very point, not agreeing with it ? So you agree that the circumstances of people who are divorced and re-married rely upon the mercy of God, just like and other persons and their sins ?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 17:21:36 GMT -5
Of course. I never argued against that. Like I said, this post is about seeking justification for plans to commit future sins, and I do not agree with that in the least.
An analogous situation involving murder would involve a person planning to commit murder in the future, based on some emotional desire to kill their victim, and justifying their plans by saying that they can later obtain the mercy of God.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2008 17:31:30 GMT -5
Whoever we are and whatever we are, we will in no way justify ourselves by attempting to measure up to God's laws. We are completely dependent upon his mercy no matter how good and righteous our lives may be.
When Jesus addressed that woman at the well he recognised that she had had FIVE husbands and that the man whom she was then living with was not her husband, presumably because she was not married to him. There is a lesson here for everyone, in that Jesus recognised there had been FIVE husbands, not one (the first) followed by adulterous marriages and a kipping up. Unless we wish to speculate the five husbands were all dead ?
Nevertheless we still have the adulterous relationship to deal with.
When a person truly repents to God, past sins are forgiven and forgotten. A new life is begun in Christ.
|
|
|
Post by IRONY on May 1, 2008 17:48:05 GMT -5
??and "UNTIL DEATH DO UP PART" is found where? ? In her own vow, for one thing. The Bible is clear on divorce and it is also clear that marriage ends at death -- the death of one of the two married, not some abstract "death of the marriage". The woman involved clearly twisted the words into something they never were meant to mean, in order to justify her sins to herself and/or others. God is not fooled, even when we lie to ourselves. OH! the irony-----RE: even when we lie to ourselves----- I believe we have enough proof to see that the 2x2s have lied to theirselves and continue to do so. They have more skeletons in their closet than any other group you can think of.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on May 1, 2008 18:02:29 GMT -5
Apparently you had this bias before you read my post and thus decided to categorize me in such a way as to allow yourself to ignore my position and its Biblical basis. You clearly don't understand anything about divorce and remarriage in biblical times. You do not have the correct interpretation. You are wrong and you should pull your head in because you just look silly arguing about something you know nothing about.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 18:04:21 GMT -5
OH! the irony-----RE: even when we lie to ourselves----- I believe we have enough proof to see that the 2x2s have lied to theirselves and continue to do so. Irony? Many people lie to themselves, whether "2x2" or not. I don't think you've proven that statement, though. The "2x2"s that I know of who have "proven" that they lied to themselves are no longer "2x2"s. This statement you have not proved.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 18:07:58 GMT -5
Apparently you had this bias before you read my post and thus decided to categorize me in such a way as to allow yourself to ignore my position and its Biblical basis. You clearly don't understand anything about divorce and remarriage in biblical times. You do not have the correct interpretation. You are wrong and you should pull your head in because you just look silly arguing about something you know nothing about. How about providing evidence for your claims, as I do, instead of merely attacks against me? You clearly have no interest in truth and would prefer to lie to yourself in order to justify your sins and you should stop spouting "pointless drivel". Correction: you make no claim about which to provide evidence. Just a pure ad hominem attack.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on May 1, 2008 18:16:32 GMT -5
You clearly don't understand anything about divorce and remarriage in biblical times. You do not have the correct interpretation. You are wrong and you should pull your head in because you just look silly arguing about something you know nothing about. How about providing evidence for your claims, as I do, instead of merely attacks against me? You clearly have no interest in truth and would prefer to lie to yourself in order to justify your sins and you should stop spouting "pointless drivel". Correction: you make no claim about which to provide evidence. Just a pure ad hominem attack. You are quick to tell other people they are wrong. But you don't like it when other people say you are wrong. There's a word for that. Further, you don't like it when other people make assumptions about your posts but this post from you is riddled with unfounded assumptions. Same word applies again. I have provided reams of evidence in my time on this forum. I feel no compulsion to bring it out on the demand of Johnny-come-lately. Respect and credibility are earned. So far you have earned neither, especially not the amount of my time required to cover this subject in depth...again. And to top it off, you have provided no evidence for your view, merely assertions.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 18:18:04 GMT -5
And to top it off, you have provided no evidence for your view, merely assertions. That's an admission that you don't accept the Bible as evidence.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 18:21:58 GMT -5
You are quick to tell other people they are wrong. But you don't like it when other people say you are wrong. There's a word for that. Further, you don't like it when other people make assumptions about your posts but this post from you is riddled with unfounded assumptions. Same word applies again. Of course, what you're not stating is that when I tell people they are wrong, I tell them why. I provide evidence and logic to back up my claim. You have failed to do so. You make nothing but baseless assertions -- yes, and assumptions. I made no assumptions, merely observations of your behavior and your unwillingness to engage in meaningful discussion. Don't post in this thread if you admit you're unwilling to provide anything of use.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on May 1, 2008 18:26:40 GMT -5
Lol.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 18:27:15 GMT -5
Point confirmed.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on May 1, 2008 18:31:56 GMT -5
The more arrogance you show, the sillier your rhetoric, the funnier you become. Unintentionally though.
|
|
|
Post by whale on May 1, 2008 18:32:31 GMT -5
Is it Ok to give advice?
Is it Ok to tell people what they should do?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 1, 2008 18:56:47 GMT -5
The more arrogance you show, the sillier your rhetoric, the funnier you become. Unintentionally though. Just more of the same useless attacks against me, ignoring everything I've posted yet again. If you want a meaningful discussion, use reason and facts. Otherwise, why are you here? Just to find people you disagree with and insult them?
|
|