Thank you Dr. Pawson for explaining this information clearly. I understand very clearly . May the good Lord raise other teachers like you. Continue to rest in peace.
I am so blessed listening his teaching. Thank you God for David Pawson You bklessed him. I learned a lot and understand. Many lesteners love his teaching his sermon. Even he is not on earth anymore but his teaching his sermon still is one of the best to listened. AMEN!!! GLORY TO GOD FOR THIS MAN TELLING THE TRUTH WHEN MOST OTHERS WONT!!
What do make of the verse I Timothy 3:2? What does it mean for the rest of the men in church who aren’t bishops? 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach
@@jesusislord3604 2And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. 3And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? 4And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. 5And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. 6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 10And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. 11And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery. (Mark 10:2-12)
One of the few True Teachers of the Word around unfortunately! God Bless you Mr Pawson for your Bravery & gift of the Spirit which is evident in your honest teaching of the word. Many false Teachers out there taking many into the pit!
He was wonderful in teaching Gods word. However Pastor Gino Jennings is still with us and he's God sent and gifted teaching right from the bible as the Apostle Paul.
This video is even better than the first one I saw publised in March of 2014. This has more details and is clear in what Jesus and Paul meant, no divorce and remarriage, or else its adultery. Thank you Mr Pawson for your insight and shedding light on this once "gray" area of Matthew 5:31-32, that has turned into darkness in some circles as they have accpted this broad view of divorce and remarriage. It makes total sense now, where as before, there were always unanswered questions, today, no more. Now more than ever, in my heart I know that God hates divorce and remarriage. The Church needs to hear these tough teachings, God wants us to get the word out to people, especially in the church that are still in darkness.
Kate Snyder I invit you to join our discusson group, you will learn a lot from Sharon Henry who has gone way beyond surface learning. Please join our discussion at facebook.com/groups/1420708881546803/ Her book is clear, easy to understand and visual, short to the point with strong examples.
I suggest you chat with Sharon, she has outdone mostly everyone that I hear, and believe me I have watched many videos concerning this Marriage Divorce and Remarriage topic. You can pick her brain directly, and yes, I am sure you may help, but also you will learn as well. :) You can download her book, who knows you may even be an asset to our group since you know alot more than the average person.
Kate Snyder There is an exception though for 'fornication' as seen by Joseph considering to divorce Mary as he thought she had commited 'fornication' during the betrothal period. Great video from David Pawson.
Kate Snyder I also came across Leslie McFall, during the years I extensively studied this topic. I read his essay and it seems pretty serious stuff. If his research is right then there is indeed NO exception whatsoever. I just wonder how come he remains in the shadow. How come preachers like David Pawson or John Piper don't know about him / never mention him. His findings seem to have a dramatic impact and should be made public...
Kate Snyder thanks a lot for sharing the link. yes I had read Mc Fall's paper, but an older (shorter) version. This updated version is so much MORE....I'm so eager to read it thank you so much!
I have listened to your explanation and it is quite biblically sound. I thank God for men like you (my pastor included) who have taken the time to study the scriptures and show that it doesn't contradict itself and that "from the beginning it wasn't so" (Jesus' words). Your last explanation of the fall outs of such action has left many children broken and have given Satan an entry point into their lives to keep them bound and have many believing that it is okay. May God allow this teaching to reach many and guide them back to the standard He has set.
And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven matt 23 : 9 - before you mention paul, he was giving a metaphor. Didnt ask anyone to call him father. God bless sister🙏
The teaching of the Cross offends people nothing else. Why do you think he went to the cross for people who could not stop what they were doing. He did away with sin by the offering of himself. So don't tell people they are sinning because they remarry. Sin is no longer an issue, but the sacrifice of Jesus is the only issue. Jesus appeared to put away sin once for all. Their sins and there iniquities I will remember no more. So what are you bringing it up? You brood of vipers you wash the outside of the pot but you don't wash the inside. God didn't send you here to bring condemnation on anyone. You're not even supposed to talk about the sins of others or discuss it among you. So why are you? Sanctimonious shitholes.
@@dougr6269 Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God” (I Cor. 6:9-10) “But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.” Matthew 24:13 1 John 3:10 “By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.”
God bless you sir. Very inspiring lecture you gave! Waoh! How I had been unknowingly unkowledgable! Now I have known the truth and the truth has set me free indeed. Glory be to God. Thanks once again. God bless your Ministry too.
Thank you Mr Pawson for telling us the truth about Marriage and divorce which is fully supported by the word of God. I pray that everyone person who has issues in their marriage take their questions and confusing to God in prayer. It helps God answers sincere prayers. I had issues as well and been praying about it for years asking God for Guidance and God answered me just three days ago. I encourage everyone who wants God's will to pray fervently about it.
How can God not recognize divorce when He divorced one of His brides in Jeremiah? how does the Bible support David Pawson's heresy? He uses twisted mistranslations of the Bible & uses it to go against other Scriptures in the Bible & you praise this heretic for his heretic message? seriously, what is one verse that is not taken out of context or that is not mistranslated that supports God not recognizing divorce?
@@humilulo have you read Jeremiah 3:14? Does this not show God speaking to Israel through the prophet after issuing a certificate of divorce in Jeremiah 3:8, and saying "I am married unto you"? Why accuse David Pawson of lying, instead of going to the scripture?
@@ajlouviere202 of course i have read Jeremiah 3:14. but what you have failed to do, AJ, is understand both the Hebrew, as well as the context of the rest of the Bible. You need to remember that the Bible doesn't contradict itself. and your interpretation has the Bible contradicting itself. so you need to figure out how Deut 24:1-4 fits with your theology. why do you and David Pawson throw out Deut 24 to fit what you want it to say? by the way, the Hebrew word in Jeremiah 3:14 cannot mean 'married' because Yahweh just divorced her. duh! The Hebrew word for both divorce and that word that gets butchered as 'married' in Jeremiah 3:14 has a wider meaning than the English words which are serious contradictions in your Bible. you throw out common sense, AJ. i mean look at you. you are telling me that a divorced person is still married. this is ludicrous. and it is all from very bad translations from Hebrew into English. a proper translation is 'am i not you master?' the Hebrew word *can* mean marriage when context allows. but context in Jeremiah 3 shows us that God divorced her. (face palm) Definitions are important.
This is the most commented topic in Mr.David Pawson teachs,and we can see that All remarried : Get offended and try to twist the scripture to suit themself.
Yep! Marriage is for life for sure. Remain unmarried or reconcile if you separate. If I can't do anything else, I'm telling you read, 🔸️🔸️Divorce and Remarriage: What the Church DIDN'T Tell You!🔸️🔸️ My jaw was on the floor after reading. You won't have any questions left after. Your eyes will be WIDE open‼‼
Bottom line people will always find away to justify there sin..if you cant see remarrige after divorce and spouse still living is adultery your 👀 are blinded by sin
Blessed by YAH Exactly. My past two relationships were with women who were previously married. I am so glad I woke up and God showed me. Words cannot express how thankful I am, though it was painful. I have never been married. But one thing is certain, I will be sure to only involve myself with a woman whom has never been married. So thankful for the truth that sets us free. This is why it is so important to seek ye first the kingdom of heaven.
but his flaw is assuming that English mistranslations are translated correctly. He bases his interpretation on the New Testament, instead of basing it on the Old Testament interpretation, which is up-side-down. oh well, most people are going to choose what they want to believe, rather that rightly dividing the word. David Pawson says that Moses compromised in Moses' law? that's heretical in the foundation of understanding the whole Bible that needs a correct interpretation for earlier Scripture.
@@crwnofenlightenment if that’s the case you’ve been married already and the new person you meet becomes an adulterous 🧐. You should reconcile with your ex-wife.
Yet to meet a divorced couple who have remarried to admit David is right. Strangely when you have done something "sinful" you will search the scriptures to support and prove your innocence
absolute garbage your seriously a very religious judgmental person who has no idea about the scriptures time you looked at yourself and pull the log out of your eye
Cada día entiendo más sobre este tema. Esto es tremendo. Pero el Señor abrirá los ojos de aquellos que están dispuestos a tomar su cruz y seguirle. bendciones 🙏
This teaching led me into absolute despair. After 20 years of hating and despising myself l finally forgave myself, knowing long ago that Jesus had forgiven me. It was like being kicked in the teeth and condemned again. I haven’t remarried and had finally thought perhaps l could if l met someone but this ended any hope and led to despair knowing I’d be out of God’s will and disappointing him
If you have a living first spouse, rejoice, as you have a chance at a restored true marriage. I legally married a woman who is still bound by her first marriage to her true husband. I have zero hope that God will help us, but do hope that I will meet a never-married woman or a widow. I brought this agony upon myself when I stole another man's wife. God knew sinners like me would try to do this and set His law against such betrayals.
@@ajlouviere202 You don't know that he needs to repent on this issue. Many feel guilt who have been sinned against. It's easy to think a divorced person, especially a man, has been negligent, unloving, unfaithful, etc, and judge them on assumptions.
@@alsontaylor6080well it sounds according to this teaching you are married once now and are out of the ability to marry another. Your situation is interesting. Never married but married a divorce person. So now you are married once, and if you divorced that makes you a divorced person. There is much that seems unclear to me.... You do and you believe I'm just thinking of your situation. I am a divorced person and according to this teaching, I am never to marry again. Which I have gospel answers too. But the pain of all this.... Ugh
@@isaactamplin8905 if a never married, marries a divorced person, this is not a Biblical marriage, it is adultery and, as such, it is necessary to divorce to leave....and then, never having been in a covenant relationship, the never married, may marry someone else...
Jesus said WHOSOEVER DIVORCES his wife and MARRIES another committith adultery. That’s weird! Jesus says divorces??? Then remarries??? So Jesus is saying that divorce or remarriage does not break the COVENANT! Jesus said adultery, that is the sin of a MARRIED person indicating that God STILL sees them as MARRIED again! Same as Romans 7:1-3, 1 Corinthians 7:10 & 39 Malachi 2:13-17. Then Jesus says whosoever MARRIES a.... DIVORCED woman committith ADULTERY!! Indicating again for the third time neither divorce nor remarriage breaks the COVENANT!! Just like the vows we take. Also it is in the Greek present continuous tense adultery or state of being an adulterer, just like Romans 7:3 So then, if she has sexual relations with another man WHILE HER HUSBAND IS STILL ALIVE, SHE IS CALLED AN ADULTERESS. Divorce does NOT equal remarriage, they are separate, two different things. There are standers all around the world waiting just like Jesus does for His bride.
It is only adultery and or fornication if they have sex many don't marry for that reason even in secular society so a Christian couple who are married will not lose their salvation in fact you can't lose your salvation that would make Gods Grace Mercy Forgiveness a lie
Remarriage is permitted for the faithful partner only when the divorce was on biblical grounds. In fact, the purpose for a biblical divorce is to make clear that the faithful partner is free to remarry, but only in the Lord (Rom. 7:1-3; 1 Cor. 7:39). Those who divorce on any other grounds have sinned against God and their partners, and for them to marry another is an act of “adultery” (Mark 10:11-12). This is why Paul says that a believing woman who sinfully divorces should “remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband” (1 Cor. 7:10-11). If she repents from her sin of unbiblical divorce, the true fruits of that repentance would be to seek reconciliation with her former husband (Matt. 5:23-24). The same is true for a man who divorces unbiblically (1 Cor. 7:11). The only time such a person could remarry another is if the former spouse remarries, proves to be an unbeliever, or dies, in which cases reconciliation would no longer be possible.
@@christolliday3054 Jesus makes a clear statement that adultery is the result of a divorce, and subsequent remarriage, not the cause. In fact, Jesus never lists any specific cause for divorce, and neither does the Old Testament, but only that "It hath been said" that in order to divorce let him give her a certificate of divorce (which the Pharisees already stated was for any reason), and then Jesus states the phrase: "except it be for fornication", which clearly means it was an exception to giving a certificate of divorce for any cause. The clear reason that you could not issue a certificate of divorce for her to become another man's wife is seen in Deuteronomy 22:13-21;23-24. A betrothed wife caught having committed fornication was stoned to death, not given a certificate of divorce in accordance with Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage). Understand the context and meaning of Jesus's words in these verses: In Matthew 19:3 the Pharisees asked Jesus a question according to the law in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 about divorce for any cause. In Matthew 19:4-6 we see Jesus reply by reciting the one-flesh covenant of marriage (God's law of marriage) in Genesis 2:23-24. In Matthew 19:7-8 we see Jesus giving the Pharisees the reason that Moses wrote the precept (Deuteronomy 24:1-4), which was because of the hardness of the hearts of the Jews of the exodus (the wicked generation kept out of the promised land) against their wives. In Matthew 19:9 Jesus affirms that the law in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 was for any reason "except for fornication" (Deuteronomy 22:13-21; 23-24) because it was unlawful to give a woman, guilty of a sexual offense, a certificate of divorce in order to become another man's wife. She was stoned to death, which freed the husband from the betrothal in order to seek another wife. However we see this is not a possibility, under the Law of Moses, which now causes the husband to commit adultery by marrying another woman. Keep in mind that Mark 10:1-12 is the same biblical account as Matthew 19:1-12, but does not have a cause for fornication. The reason for this is because this account was written and given to the Gentiles who had no knowledge of the Law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-21; 23-24.
@@christolliday3054 what was commanded by Christ, for those who are married, who abandon their covenant spouse, and those who are abandoned by their covenant spouse, is addressed in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. Christ is issuing a clear command to an abandoned husband that he "must not divorce" his wife, and to the wife abandoning him to "remain unmarried or be reconciled" to her husband, in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. This makes what some believe is Paul overriding Christ's command, in 1 Corinthians 7:15, and giving an abandoned covenant spouse permission to divorce their covenant spouse and marry someone else, an impossibility. This puts Paul directly at odds with Christ, which makes it clear that 1 Corinthians 7:15 (which does not use the terms divorce or marry another) is not referring to divorce, only to separation (which is written in the original Greek texts), and could not possibly be an allowance for divorce, or remarriage, since that would violate the commands and teachings previously given in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. Unbelievers, who are married to believers, are sanctified by the covenant of marriage (one-flesh), along with their children, is seen in 1 Corinthians 7:12-14.
This was an amazing explanation. Also, this has been totally lost in 21st century society. You only hear these lectures on social media. I have never heard anything about divorce preached from the pulpit. Pastors are afraid of the subject.
In the context of the scriptures, specifically within the Jewish tradition, the terms "putting away" and "divorce" often refer to two different concepts. Putting Away is commonly used to describe the act of separating or ceasing to cohabit with a spouse without legally dissolving the marriage. It can imply a physical separation or a temporary break, but the marital bond remains intact. In some cases, "putting away" can refer to a form of separation due to a variety of reasons, such as adultery, abandonment, or irreconcilable differences. The purpose of putting away is to allow for reflection, reconciliation, and potential restoration of the marital relationship. Divorce, on the other hand, refers to the legal dissolution of a marriage. It is the formal process of ending the marital contract and releasing both parties from their marital obligations and rights. Divorce permanently terminates the marriage relationship, allowing both individuals to remarry if they choose to do so. Divorce can be sought for various reasons, including adultery, abuse, desertion, or irreconcilable differences. It's important to note that translations that refer to the word fornication as being the exception of when a man is allowed to 'put away' his wife is infact correct. If there was fornication it is because the couple were betrothed to be married but not yet legally married. In Jewish custom and law, an engagement period was called the 'betrothal period' and it was the first part of the two part process of Jewish marriage, which creates the legal relationship without the mutual obligations. This is why it reminds us that we need to remain faithful until Christ's return as the believer saved and redeemed is also like the betrothed. Beware of idols lest we too fornicate during our salvation and Christ returns and 'put's us away' Hope this helps those seeking clarification.
It doesn’t bc David Pawson explains it correctly! Divorce like when God divorced Israel said NOW RETURN to Me for I am your husband meaning still in covenant! Divorce doesn’t end a covenant
Wow! This is a hard teaching. "Not everyone can accept this word"........ Matt 19/11. I agree with the disciples; "if this is the situation between a husband & wife, it is better not to marry". (in the first place). vs 10.
I concur totally and the same with the Apostle Paul when he said in 1 Corith. 7. I wish that all men be like him. It is better to stay single. I bet, if a number of single people hear and understand the implications of marriage that this teaching evinces, many will opt not to get married. As one guy said, in this case it is better to fornicate than get married😅
I know look at Hosea, in a different light! Thank you, for exposing what marriage is between God, the union of oneness. Staying true to God’s covenant.
Thank you. I've prayed many years for God to reveal once for all the whole truth in this. I was divorced not by choice - Xh cheated, left and remarried . All my circles pressure me to remarry and say God wants me to be happy. I tried once but it was a spectacular quick failure (annulment). Frankly I was relieved and I love my freedom. But I wondered for years if God condemns me for that. Now I know continuing in adultery would have condemned me infinitely more. I repented and I'm very happy, I enjoy my life and my son. Xh has lived in rage and obsession against me, nearly 20 yrs later still picking fights and going to court over issues from back then, now estranged from our son due to his abuse of son. Yet many in my family despise me and think ex must be better and I must be to blame, that's why I'm still single.
Why did he leave you ? Did you show him respect and submission? Its not easy but looking at our own behavior and repenting brings about miraculous changes in a husband. Just following through with our own vow to love and obey till death do us part ,changes everything.
@@babycakesweetiepie77why is it that our first response is to assume the wife wasn't submissive etc? My husband left me and our children to live a homosexual lifestyle. Our love life wasn't an issue, I moved across the country away from my home, family and life, to obey my husband. I tried. I wasn't perfect...no one is, but I tried. He is now married to another man, I am alone. I feel punished for his sin.
How dangerous is then when most of the churches today not only pursued people that it is ok, but also to try to brain wash people treating them of staying on the situation they are since going back would "condemn them" for real. Or the other side that are and enjoy being on that situation on pursuing you to do the same and give to yourself a second chance rather then endure on faith when you are on time. But for others it is too late now. How sad are things that misleading people to hell just to cover human errors. Really heartbreaking
He explains thinks so calm & simple to the point where people can understand. A 5 year old can understand his teaching out of the Bible so it’s no excuse why adults don’t get it!
I am Trying to think how a couple would Practically apply a a divorce from a remarriage and how one would counsel a couple convicted of this teaching. Take for example an older remarried couple who is not sexually active (as is the case often at a certain age especially with chronic medical conditions). What would satisfy this “divorce all remarriage” doctrine? Would a “legal divorce” on paper be sufficient and the couple go on living as room mates like they were before? Still holding hands, going to the movies, dinner and church together like best friends that they actually are anyway. Would Pawson go even further and say no holding hands, no living under one roof, no talking to each other anymore. What about a younger couple trying to apply this doctrine. Still socially active together (after all kids and friends remain the same) but just not sexually active or active in the traditional sense, but “legally divorced.” The more one considers how to practically apply this doctrine the more absurd it seems. God bless any minister trying to counsel two couples divorcing who are actually in love. It is bad enough counseling those who divorce because they “fell out of love”. It is easier to sit up on a pulpit and preach this doctrine but The more you consider how To practically apply this doctrine and actually pastor couples through the process the more absurd it seems. What it would become is the Scenario that many divorces couples already experience in that both couples or basically Still together but “legally separated.” It seems that legalism (divorce on paper) would be the rule for couples who for better or worse are already “one” even just on earth. Thinking through/past just the preaching and more of actually pastoring and counseling makes me believe that Jesus may also be referring to pastors who preach this doctrine as well when He commanded “let no man separate” a vow (maybe rashly or wrongly made) that was made before God. There are no Biblical examples of remarried couples divorcing on account of this doctrine but there are plenty of Biblical examples of keeping vows (even wrongly made) like Saul being anointed King even though God said “they rejected Me” and it displeased Him. Is this preaching and practice of divorcing couples just as wrong as the remarriage?
It's a big problem for me that Derek Prince married a divorced woman whose husband is still alive, after his first wife died- They apparently were counseled to not, but still went ahead and did it. Now so many people look up to him and quote him and his works- and I still have to believe that is was sin-and I don't know if he repented or not, but I haven't seen it anywhere that they separated from the remarriage...I mean isn't that what Jesus means about not running out of oil before the end of our lives-Holy Spirit wisdom and guidance?
Prince is falsely married to a woman who already has a husband. To ignore this sin is to cheat her first husband and to encourage others to commit adultery and then claim their prize by "marriage." God will never bind such people in a true marriage, and Prince needs to legally divorce this wife of another immediately.
@Mdme Foi Derek Prince was a family friend and this particular question troubled me for some time after his marriage to Ruth. He passed away in 2003 and although he never recognized that marriage as adultery, by God's grace Ruth passed away 5 years before he did and her first husband died a year before her. Both of them were free to be married when they died. That marriage, however, is the one big stain on his life and ministry but to be honest none of us will leave this world with a perfect record and it's only by God's great mercy that he reveals the truth to any of us.
Derek Prince"s second wife was a divorced woman whose husband was alive when she married Prince. Did Prince ever have sermons on marriage& remarriage?..come to think of it..🤔
Pitbulls Forever yeh that upset me too because he was a great teacher. I saw his interview and he said that Ruth came from an abusive relationship and he said he believe in matters of abuse God will overlook it. He even admitted they kept their marriage private and not many ppl knew about it. It put up a red flag to me. Derek made up an exception because he felt that God was giving him Ruth as a partner in the ministry. I was discouraged when I did not see a biblical basis for his decision.
Abuse in Marriage people say there are gray areas what about abuse well the bible DOES talk about it! Why have we never seen this or our pastors talked about it? 1 Peter 2:18 Slaves, in reverent fear of God SUBMIT yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are HARSH. 19 For it is commendable if someone bears up under the PAIN OF UNJUST SUFFERING because they are conscious of God. 20 But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. 21 TO THIS YOU WERE CALLED, BECAUSE CHIST SUFFERED FOR YOU, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. 22 “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.”[e] 23 When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. 24 “He himself bore our sins” in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; “by his wounds you have been healed.” 25 For “you were like sheep going astray,”[f] but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. 1 Peter 3 New International Version (NIV) 3 WIVES, IN THE SAME WAY submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3 Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. 4 Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. 5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands, 6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear. 7 Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers. 1 Peter 4:Living for God 4 Therefore, since Christ suffered in his body, arm yourselves also with the same attitude, because whoever suffers in the body is done with sin. 2 As a result, they do not live the rest of their earthly lives for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God.
Correct. And Prince was wrong on this issue as a result. People, we must NEVER follow a person (D.Prince, J.Macarthur, Hagee,etc) if they are in contradictory to Christ on ANY DOCTRINAL issue, such as this. We must be like the Bereans and search the scriptures to see if EACH THING is true. Derek prince's popularity on other issues doesn't excuse his false teaching on this.
Jesus did indirectly address homosexuality - or at least the so-called same-sex marriage - by proclaiming that marriage is between one man and one woman, and that it should be for life. Besides, Jesus said that He did not come to abolish the Law (of Moses) and the prophets, but to fulfill them. The Law of Moses forbade homosexuality as a sin. Pastor Pawson should have been more precise in that statement, because many liberal religious people who support homosexual marriages also claim that Jesus supposedly said nothing about homosexuality.
Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge-Hebrews 13:4. Divorce has nothing to do with God. It has everything to do with selfishness and carnal thinking in all of us. In fact, God warns against putting asunder what He joined together (Mark 10:9). Furthermore, if anyone decides to divorce or separate, they must stay single or else reconcile with their spouse (1 Corinthians 7:10-11). Unless the marital covenant is nullified by death of a spouse, anything beyond that is Adultery. Scripture warns that Adulterous will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). Marriage is a process of proper consultation, proper counseling, proper arbitration, proper thought, proper introspection trying to resolve disagreements, whether big or small. Don't play with someone else's life. You know it may be that the other person is more vested in the marriage than you. But you still never give up. Don't play with their lives like that because again that could come back to haunt you in your life and your hereafter, so slow down. It is rewarding to work on marriage. God continue to bless your union!
@@paulvaughan3120 your comment shows how much you've completely misunderstood her comment. Who ever mentioned public criticism, non support, & dismissal? She's bewailing the situation, not being happy about it. Unbelievable how you've twisted it around.
We are the church in revelations that is compromising. We want our comforts more than our God. Our truth isn’t Gods truth. Try to stand strong in these troubled times.
So, if I understand correctly, sexual relations (fornication) during the betrothal dissolves the engagement and makes both parties free to marry another person... ? or only the innocent party? but if one of the two betrothed is repudiated without cause of fornication, they are as if already married before God and therefore neither of them can marry another person under penalty of exposing the other to adultery? then many are adulterers because many have broken their betrothal without this cause? not to mention the divorced-remarried ones.. that's terrible... and what about arranged or sham marriages? Thank you in advance.
I like your questions. I have any myself. Such as: Jesus says to the woman at the well, who is not a Jew, you have been divorced 5 times, by David's logic of keeping with God's way, Jesus should have said you committed one divorce and adultery 4 times from your husband. Why would Jesus agree with the teaching of Moses if it was less then, and apparently wrong? Further more his use of divorce when this is not a situation where people are trying to trap him. Or in a situation where Jesus is being trapped by an evil questioning, why did he use their line of speech of divorce and not reveal or expound that in God's eyes they are still married, or had other language for this, but he speaks? Know I know he says what him and his father did front hr beginning about man. I am not sure in this area I agree but have struggles to whether or not this view is accurate. To bring this human, temporal marriage ( of the flesh ) to God level, by comparison with hosea, then God is an adulterer by having gentiles as a wife to Jesus. Would that not be the logic, reasoning? I didn't hear the gospel in response to people remarried or divorced? This would mean my parents of 25 years should be divorced. What does it mean that God has moved through them, my dad mainly? What does this mean for me, who my wife has left me, being an unbeliever she was and still is, what am I then? What about those who awoke sexuality? just as in the song of songs the woman says don't awaken till it's appropriate time? What those who it is awake? Where does the gospel fit in all this? I do have answers to most of these by the way.
@@isaactamplin8905 slow down....nothing has been said, about the woman, at the well...ergo an argument, from silence...er....invalid...or no conclusion can be obtained from this prestation...or story...
I don't get why he would still "attend" a church that has a divorce recovery workshop run by divorced and remarried couples! 1:26:46 I'd be gone despite the bonds I created there. I'd try to pull those who would listen to me out of there though. But to continue to "attend"? Nope!
I'm playing 'devil's advocate' here because I am still not 100% sure which side of this debate I fall on. And I have studied it for years. God said it isn't good for man to be alone. So if a spouse walks out and goes off with someone else never to return, the spouse who has been left behind now has a life of being alone to look forward to. God already said that isn't good. All these teachings on divorce and remarriage don't seem to address this.
Elizabeth McEwen Actually Jesus did adress this. In Matthew 19:12. If you have studied this topic for years, I assume you know the context in chapter 19. Jesus is asked to give his opinon about divorce. He explains that divorce is not allowed, except for fornication, and that whosoever marries the person that is put away commits adultery. The disciples (verse 10)express their consternation by exclaiming "if this is the case between man and woman, it's better not to get married at all!". Like you, they probably found these teachings of Jesus very hard / black-and-white. Probably unfair for the "innocent party". But note that Jesus never makes any distinction between innocent party or guilty party. Instead he goes ahead and makes an interesting comparison (in verse 12). He says: some people are eunuch by birth....others are MADE eunuchs by men. This particular phrase, in this particular context (Jesus's teachings about divorce and remarriage) can mean only one thing: if someone divorces you, he/she is making you an eunuch. (a person who cannot have sexual relationships anymore). I know it's hard, but that is what Jesus is saying. And that is why God hates divorce so much. It's not only one of the most painful experience one can go through. It is also incredibly damaging. Many people don't accept this interpretation because they don;t understand it. They think that God forbidding the "innocent party" to remarry is a form of punishment. (unfair and unjust, ....towrards a betrayed and abandoned spouse). They fail to realise that the innocent party is being victimised by their adulterous spouse. If someone divorces you, not only you are emotionally hurt, financially damaged etc etc etc....but also...."you are stuck" in a life of singleness. Is this a punishment from God? No, not at all. This is the consequence of being in a covenant. Just because your spouse leaves or cheats on you, in the eyes of God, you are still in a covenant with that person. The covenant only ends when one of the two people dies. So basically it's like a person who gets run over by a car, driven by a drunk driver. Let's say that person ends up in a wheel chair.....It's totally unfair. He is the innoncent party, and he being stuck in a wheelcahir is the result of someone else's sin. It's not God's punishment. With divorce it is a similar situation. That's why Jesus is so damn serious about it ...His teachings (Luke 16:18, Mark 19:11....) are about divorce, but all of them are also about remarriage,...and all of them make it clear that remarriage is called adultery....no matter if the participant have officially divorced, and no matter if they are innoccent parties or guilty parties. I hope this helps a bit. God bless.
Elizabeth McEwen I think, generally speaking, there is not much support for those who go through life alone. There are plenty of people who are single against their will. Some of them as a result of divorce, otheres because they simply cannot find a partner, others because of health issues or handicaps....What about these people? It is not good for them to be alone either. I think it is the Church's job to embrace these people. (that's one way to adress this subject). Married people should open their arms and houses to embrace the single and lonely . Unfortunately this happens rarely (Especially for "older singles"). Divorced people are often left to their own lot. They are often emotionally broken very traumatized and it's difficult for them to find any support in the church. One way of addressing this issue is simply by realizing that these people need prayer, first and foremost, and they need to be loved and supported. A divorced person needs to have a family, a community to support him/her, but also to encourage him/her to pray for receiving healing. and to get counseling towards forgivness and reconciliation.
universalblob Good response - thank you! That actually does make a lot of sense. So was Moses wrong in allowing divorce? I have read that he allowed it because men in their hardness of heart were discarding their wives for no good reason, and in that culture a discarded woman had little chance of survival. It was assumed that she would need to remarry, and in order not to be accused of adultery, she needed a 'bill of divorcement' to prove she no longer belonged to another man. Wasn't this an example of the covenant being legally broken?
Elizabeth McEwen Hi Elizabeth, I think that is a very good question. I have wondered about it too, and I would like to know David Pawson 's take on this as well. The passage you are referring to is Deuteronomy 24: 1-4. Jesus's interpretation about this law is, that it was made because of the hardness of the hearts of men. But Jesus clearly states "but in the beginning it was not so"....This wasn't god's intention. What God has joined together, cannot be separated by men. (in other words, you may have legal papers of divorce....but you are still in the covenant, in God's eyes). This law (Deut 24:1-4) was not intended by God, but it was rather a "reparative" law to contain a damage that had already occourred (a woman being found unclean; a woman being put away by her husband and exposed to the risk of undergoing even more trouble or sexual immorality or abuse). Personally I think that the bill of divorcement was meant to protect the woman from her first husband. (to avoid him trying to claim her back as his own wife, after she had moved on, in a sort of abusive way), rather than saying "The covenant is terminated". The reason why the woman could not go back to her first husband after having been with a second man, is explained in verse 4, and has to do with keeping Israel "clean" from being contaminated. In Israel it would have been unlikely that she would have found a husband after having been divorced. (Jewish men were usually only keen on marrying virgin women). So if she got remarried, it was very likely to be with a Pagan man. Many of the laws in the Old Testament are laws that are meant to keep Israel separated from pagan costumes and unclean traditions. So for me this is regulation follows in line with that. If she would go back to a Jew after having been with a pagan, she would bring uncleanness on the House of Israel. But such a law would not apply to us, as new Testament Christians. (we live in the new covenant, we are not Jewish... reconciliation after divorce is and should be possible, even when there has been adultery).
So glad he said it, and went all the way without mysteries . I’m glad on his behalf to disclose this truth with a resolution of leaving second/third/marriages without emotion precedent based compromise ;before his death. May the Lord account Him for his faithfulness on this subject and many others Let us be careful not to compromise and twist the word of God, because of the amount of our own harm and mistakes we have done. If a homosexual marriage has to break even with kids(perhaps adopted,etc) then so does a adulterous marriage among believers. Repent my people, time is short. Do not lose your salvation for fear of harsh decisions and for your own mistakes. God honors righteousness, He will honor you aswell for heeding his commands
That is absurd. Please do NOT divorce the spouse of your second marriage. When Jesus was talking to the woman at the well, He described her as having HUSBANDS, He did NOT say boyfriends/adulterers. He recognized her marriages. The Lord has sent new spouses into the lives of many Christians. Many evangelists/preachers have been happily remarried for decades. The Lord would NOT have done that if He was putting them into PERPETUAL adultery. They confess the sin and He FORGIVES.
Brothers, I've searched in the Interlineal Verse Greek of the New Testament, and 1 Cor. 7:11 says "choriste", wich Is translated as "she be separated", and not "she's already separated". Could you explain to me the right meaning of the Greek expressionn, please?
Hi If I may offer a possible explanation - the whole of 1 Cor 7 is tackling questions raised about marriage but we are not told what the specific questions were Specifically v11 - if follows the strong emphasis of the permanence of marriage in v10 ‘to the married ….a wife must not separate frothier husband
Its very simple without demonoc intervention folks. A marriage is not legitimate (consummated) until they have sex. The two shall BECOME one FLESH. That is talking about.... SEX. The marriage covenant to a wife, is consummated made official..until her husband has sex with her. That's why scripture says if he lies with a woman that is not betrothed or married, he is to endow her to be his wife. Not optional. And just as The marital Covenant is consummated by sex withbher husbsnd, so it is resolved if she has willful sex with another. Even when King David's wife Michale, was taken away captive and became another man's wife and King David got her back... She hated him, and mocked him ...and he had nothing to do with her, thence forth. Men, date ir marry a virgin, a true widow, or a womsn you're 10,000% positive, was sexually pure, and her man absndoned her...not the reverse.
Adding guilt, shame and misery to lives already disrupted. Would be a much more graceful message (that's as in "full of grace") were he to offer encouragement and legitimate advice to those in second marriages.
The building blocks to a healthy home is Lay the foundation of God first. A house out of order usually means God, is not first. I’m far from perfect I’ve been separated from my husband since 2018. I’m struggling if I should divorce but after hearing this I’m screwed.
@@philipbuckley759 God does not recognize same-sex marriage as the judicial system. In the eyes of God that is sexual immorality, plain and simple. If a homosexual couple is married by the state then one or both repent then divorce to live for the Lord. If one decides to be in a heterosexual marriage then that's marriage in the Lord's eyes. If the marriage is between man and woman and is consensual and made the vows. That is the covenant spouse but if they divorce and remarry while the covenant spouse is alive, then they would be in adultery.
2 Why Divorce and Remarriage Is Adultery & Why We Can Not Remarry To Enter His Kingdom 1 Corinthians 7:10 10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she Must Remain Unmarried OR else Be Reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife. 1 Corinthians 7:39 “A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.” Romans 7:1 By law a married woman is Bound to her husband As Long As He Is Alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3 So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, She IS Called an Adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man Luke 16:18 “Jesus said: Whosoever/anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” (Greek present continuous tense or state of being) Hebrews 13:4 Let marriage be held in honor(reverence) among ALL, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous!!! 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do NOT be DECEIVED!!!!!!! Neither fornicators, nor ADULTERERS, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.” John 14:23 Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. Whoever does not love Me does not keep My words. John 15:6 Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a useless branch and withers. Such branches are gathered into a pile to be burned. 1 Corinthians 16:22 “If anyone does not love the Lord, that person is cursed. Our Lord, come!” 1 John 2:4 If anyone says, “I know Him,” but does not keep His commandments, he is a liar, and the truth is not in him. Matthew 5:31 Jesus said, “Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except fornication (porneia/sex before marriage) causes her to commit adultery (moicheia/sexual sin of married person); and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery. (Greek present continuous tense or state of being an adulterer) Matthew 19:8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were HARD. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I (Jesus) tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for fornication (porneia), and marries another woman commits adultery (moicheia). Divorce is for the hard hearted Jesus says, the bitter and one in unforgiveness Matthew 19:10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” -(This is how serious marriage is! They recognized it by their answer! Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7 ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” Malachi 2:1 For I HATE divorce says the LORD! The 7th Commandment Thou Shall NOT commit Adultery! The Moral Law (10 Commandments) written on our hearts will Never be done away with. Malachi 2:16 “For the man or woman who does not love their spouse but divorces them, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.” The covenant of marriage is very serious in God’s eyes only broken by death and He does not take it lightly as our culture has & changed it’s views. The LORD does not change - Malachi 3:6. Amen! Thank God He doesn’t sway like we do. Mathew 6:14-15 For if you forgive those who sin against you your heaven Father will forgive you. But if you do NOT forgive others sins your heavenly Father will not forgive your sins! Matthew 7:21-23 Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. MANY will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you (Bible John 1:1 The Word was God); depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness! “Wisdom will save you from the immoral woman, from the seductive words of the promiscuous woman. She has abandoned her husband and ignores the covenant she made before God. Entering her house leads to death; it is the road to the grave. The man who visits her is doomed. He will never reach the paths of life.” Proverbs 2:16-19 James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe-and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Matthew 14:3 For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife.4 For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her for she is your brothers wife. I Corinthians 7:39 “A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.” I Corinthians 7:27 “Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed (don’t even seek it). Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife.” 1 Timothy 3:2 (KJV) 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; …12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. VOWS Jeremiah 34:18 Those who have violated my covenant and have not fulfilled the terms of the covenant they made before me, I will treat like the calf they cut in two and then walked between its pieces. Numbers 30:1-2 (KJV) 30 And Moses spake unto the heads of the tribes concerning the children of Israel, saying, This is the thing which the Lord hath commanded. 2 If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth. Ecclesiastes 5:4-6 (KJV) 4 When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. 5 Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. 6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?
“Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned.” 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 KJV looks like he missed this verse!
Some teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16.
@@ajlouviere202 i assume your using KJV in 1 corithians 7:15 "you are no longer under bondage in such cases". If you look up the meaning of bondage in merriam-webster dictionary: "a state of being bound usually by compulsion (as of law or mastery)" Which fits the bound to law of marriage etc. However it does not permit one too divorce but rather if an unbeliever abandons you.
@@fredarroyo7429 28 And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues.
The idea that Erasmus added a word to the New Testament in order to justify his views of divorce and remarriage started with an essay by British writer Leslie McFall, and what he argued is basically repeated by Pawson here. It must be pointed out, however, that Clement, Tertullian, Novatian, Origen, and Jerome (early Church Fathers) held more-or-less the same position on divorce and remarriage as Erasmus did, and they all had access to Greek manuscripts much older than Erasmus had. That said, I tend to agree with Pawson on divorce and remarriage, though I grant that there is a possibility that adultery could be legitimate grounds for divorce according to the New Testament.
Maybe so, but that doesn't mean a person can remarry. They must then remain single, mustn't they? I love McFall's book; it felt cleansing reading that.
If you compare the “Textus Receptus” as produced by Erasmus, with the “Majority” and (“much older”) “Critical” texts, you do indeed find an extra word “ei” (Strongs 1487) in front of “me”. (Strongs 3361) This changes the sense from “not for fornication” to “if not for fornication”. In other words, it changes what was intended as an “exclusion” to an “exception”. Which is a subtle but huge difference, rendered correctly only by Darby (literal), Orthodox Jewish and Jerusalem Bibles. It is really interesting if you check out the (5) Gospel manuscripts that Erasmus used. Not a single one reads “ei me” and three read “me”. Erasmus wanted Greek and Latin translations to agree and sometimes changed the Greek to suit the Latin. (They are “side by side”) This appears to be what he has done here. As for Church tradition, the Catholics stand against divorce/remarriage to this day. Even the Church of England held out until Charles and Camilla. I'm afraid that this liberal tradition came out of the Reformation. Pawson's position is not based upon this argument. McFall was on the right track, but made it too complicated. Unfortunately, he is no longer around to challenge.
@@johnalbent THE BIBLICAL TEACHING ON DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE IS THE ONLY research book, except for Jesus' words in the scriptures, that I strongly advise people read. Jesus does not contradict the word of God on this matter, John Bennett. In fact, the churches are chock full of divorce-remarriage adultery because of that Erasmean error brought into the churches back in the early 1500s. You really ought to read Dr. Leslie (a man from the UK) McFall's book; it'll scare you nigh unto death and you will have nowhere to go with this lie about divorce being supported by Jesus Christ. He did no such thing. If you refuse to read McFall's work, then you will never know.
Adultery and fornication are not unpardonable sins. Divorce doesn't dissolve a one-flesh union, only death does that; and that's physical death, not merely spiritual death.
If you can help me by answering the questions below, I would appreciate it. 1) I have not found a text that says that a MAN abandoned (passive) by his wife commits adultery if he marries another woman or that he should remain alone; 2) a woman abandoned, even for an unjust cause (Deut. 24), could remarry (she was not to be stoned as an adulteress, Deut. 22), except to priests (Lev. 21). After the coming of the Lord, the woman unjustly abandoned can no longer marry? Was there more freedom for the abandoned woman before? Jesus said that he would not repeal the Law given by His Father. 3) Why does the text about "divorce" (or separation) appear in Luke in the middle of texts about money? 4) Why is it believed that the union of one flesh is something ontological, and there are several passages in which it is demonstrated that this does not occur (Abraham and Hagar, marriage with foreigners, relations between relatives, Ex. 22,17, I Cor. 5, I Cor .6, Deut. 24...) 5) The verbs allow and command are interchanged in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. Why does almost everyone who preaches Matthew 19 ignore this interchange in Mark 10? 6) Why do people ignore that the procedural question of the divorce certificate has value? Think with me: what was the penalty for adultery? Stoning? Not always. If there were no witnesses and she was guilty, the penalty for the same offense would be different, according to Num. 5. Why is it not noticed that God made this point in Isaiah 50 when asking where the divorce certificate would be? 7) if an unbeliever leaves his believing spouse and disappears in the world. In a short time, no one knows the whereabouts of the person, and not even if he is alive (the Brazilian Civil Code even regulates absence, by the way), the believing spouse would be prohibited from getting married permanently, because how would he know if the other died? 8) do you think that in Corinth there were no divorced people? If in Israel the concept of marriage was no longer there, in the Greek environment there was no divorce? Paul did not give the Corinthians any divorce decrees. 9) Paul told Timothy that doctrines of demons would arise: prohibition of marriages and food. Do you know anywhere banning food only to leaders? I am not. So why interpret that the ban on marriages that would arise would only be for leaders (as we usually interpret it, understanding Catholics in that position)? 10) Paul said in Romans 7 that the wife was bound to her husband unto death by the LAW, not by an indissoluble Neoplatonic ontological bond. The woman could be required by the man if he did not give her a certificate of divorce. But if he gave it, even if unjustly and because of the hardness of heart, she was not bound to him by the LAW. Paul used the rule to use a metaphor. God bless you!
No, Moses did not require virginity of every bride. Moses demanded the virginity of a *virgin.* that's all. people who were previously married were allowed to be non-virgins. and God allowed it too. Mr. Pawson, your logic is so mistaken, that your claims against virginity make Ruth & Boaz's marriage to be illegitimate because she wasn't a virgin when she married Boaz. For those who don't know Ruth, she is an ancestor in the Messiah's lineage. So u have a serious problem attempting to claim that Moses claimed that virginity was required for *all* brides. Nope. Just those who claimed to be virgins, that's all.
Fornication is different than adultery *because it is a broader term.* It is inclusive of both premarital sexual relationships as well as post-marital relationships with those other than the spouse since it refers to *all* illicit sex *both inside and outside the bounds of marriage.* God divorced Israel *after* having been married to her; He divorced Israel *because she was committing adultery* . Hosea divorced Gomer for adultery she committed *after* they were married. So the examples of God and Israel and Hosea and Gomer *point to adultery after marriage* as being the exception. Might the exception include pre-marital sex as well? Yes, the Mosaic law indicated a man could declare his wife was a non-virgin at the time of the marriage consummation and she would be stoned (ending the marriage by death) unless her parents could provide proof of her virginity. We saw the example of this exception during the 'supposed' pre-marital sexual sin of Mary. *But the examples in scripture show adultery in particular being included 'in' the exception.* This cannot be ignored. Hosea already knew Gomer was committing fornication when he married her but he married her anyway. The divorce in his case was based on the adultery she committed *after they were married* which included having a child with another man. God will take back Israel (when she repents) and Hosea did take back Gomer after she repented. Gomer did not marry another so Hosea was able to take her back. As long as Israel does not marry another God will taker her back also. (Do not take the mark of the beast, which is essentially entering into a marriage covenant with another husband, i.e., the Devil). Remarriage is a different subject that divorce. Remarriage is only allowed once the wife is released from her husband when he dies. Biblically the man was 'allowed' to have multiple wives living at the same time...however, he could not divorce a wife *in order to* take another wife. If he took a second wife he could not diminish the marital rights, clothing and food of the first wife. He also could not marry two sisters while they were both alive (as they would be rivals). Is it God's ideal plan for a man to have multiple wives? No. The example of Adam having one wife proves that one husband and one wife is ideal...God said it was very good. Later, when God re-established man through Noah, Noah and each of his three sons only had one wife apiece, again proving God's 'ideal' plan for marriage as one male to one female. IF a male has taken a wedding vow saying they will forsake all others till death, I would take that to mean they have given up the right to have more than one wife (there are countries and even places in the U.S. where polygamy is allowed). *So all vows to God need to be considered as well as God's law.* Thank you David Pawson for sharing what many will not. God bless you.
God divorced Israel but reminds her of the covenant and calls her to repent in Jeremiah 3:14-20, "14Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion: 15And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding. 16And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, saith the LORD, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more. 17At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart. 18In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers. 19But I said, How shall I put thee among the children, and give thee a pleasant land, a goodly heritage of the hosts of nations? and I said, Thou shalt call me, My father; and shalt not turn away from me. 20Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the LORD." Nothing in Hosea suggests there was a divorce. She left and was living with the man who sold her into slavery. God gave no instruction to Hosea to "remarry" Gomer.
@@ajlouviere202 You're right, it really is God talking in Hosea 2 and God's prophecy wasn't necessarily *an exact mirror* of Hosea and Gomer. God did divorce Israel (Hosea 2:2) and we read that God will betroth her to Himself once again (Hosea 2:16, 2:19-20). I assumed a divorce between Hosea and Gomer as well. We know Gomer went off into an adulterous relationship and then Hosea took her back. It never says they divorced and then remarried. I assumed that based on what God was saying to Israel and His use of Hosea as a picture for them to see as well as the partial names of Hosea's and Gomer's children but you are correct, it does not explicitly say that Gomer and Hosea divorced and remarried.
@@boltingpuppies read that verse in Jeremiah 3:14 again. It specifically says through the prophet that God declares that He is still married to Israel after the divorce in verse 8.
@@boltingpuppies that is consistent with Jesus commanding the divorcing wife in 1 Corinthians 7:11 to "remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband." Look at the specific language being used here. Jesus is saying that she is both unmarried but still has a one-flesh covenant husband. Both uphold the permanence until death of the one-flesh marriage covenant.
Things to consider that will help you to understand Mr. Pawson's teaching in this video: The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death. The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. But when Jesus died on the cross, he caused the Jews to be dead to the law of Moses so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the law of Moses over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the whole law is no longer possible for those in Israel and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15. The phrase "sexual immorality" being used in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9, in place of "fornication", creates conflict with what is written about fornication and adultery in Hosea 4:13-14, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and Galatians 5:19-21. Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife. Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned by the unbeliever, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way they word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "15But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not under bondage," which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, when this is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 has the Apostle Paul giving permission to remarry do not understand that the abandoned husband in 1 Corinthians 7:11 is expected to also remain unmarried, in order to be reconciled with his wife. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh in marriage puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, by implying that he has issued an opposing command only four scriptures later. The other false claim that is being widely used is that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to a divorced man and a virgin woman who has never been married. This has been taught for some time in churches as to refer to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, including the divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and of Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound" in these verses is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:3-7. The Jewish couples in ancient Israel who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with the first two verses, speaking exclusively to men that have never married. If they were married, they were bound to a wife, but if they never betrothed or married, or if they were widowed, they were not bound. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly about virgin women, who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is again speaking of a single, never before wed man, of youthful age, with a virgin bride who has become of age to bear children "let them marry." Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring to the man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged) to his wife, under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which means that those among the never before wed in the congregation do well if they choose to marry their betrothed virgin, and those who are also never before married do better if they choose not to, under the current climate. For proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unlawful unions. The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24. The wife in Matthew 5:31-32 and Matthew 19:9 is not being charged with fornication. When you say "except for" that doesn't mean it is what the wife is actually being charged with. It means it's adultery unless for that reason, not because of that reason. The wife in Matthew 5:32 would be caused to commit adultery, with the exception that she was being charged with fornication, which in that case she would have been stoned to death according to Deuteronomy 22:20-21, not free to marry another man who would also be comitting adultery with her. In simple terms, how could a wife, who was to be stoned for fornication according to the law, be caused to commit adultery? The changing of fornication in these verses to mean adultery, after two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, attempts to make Jesus a legalist and a hypocrite, by setting the two adulteresses free from the penalty of the law, in John 8:11 and Luke 7:36-50, but condemning the women in Matthew 5:31-32 and Matthew 19:9. This is a terrible misrepresentation of Christ, who has come to set the captives free from a life of hardships and unforgiveness, and to protect the sanctity of the one-flesh covenant of marriage as a holy covenant before God. Mark 10:1-12 is the same biblical record of Matthew 19:1-12, which both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel, because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans and Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching.
AJ Louviere i have one question. My wife divorced me....can I remarry. I did not divorce her....I can't find in scripture what is in case when man is divorced. Can u help me...anyway I stand for my marriage. Gby
@@jankorec8345 I know this is a difficult situation for you but the scriptures do not give any allowances for you to remarry while you are still one-flesh in a covenant of marriage to your wife. God does not recognize remarriage while both spouses remain living.
@@jankorec8345 I want to ask if you found my explanations to be clear and helpful in understanding why Jesus does not allow remarriage after divorce under the New Covenant with Christ?
AJ Louviere thanks...i found right the way while i listening Mr. David who said im in covenant with her even she divorced me...im very sad in our church i dont know how to explain that remarriage is adultery...pastor already remarry two divorced couple....do you have some idea how to help my pastor? Please pray for my wife...she is now in 4th relationship....she made also arbotion...and yes im now sigle father to my 3 kids and with out God i cant make it, this is for sure
Ok this all works out really well if you haven't been divorced. You can sit there and wave your finger at those who got unlucky like me who's wife divorced me because she decided to pursue women. I tried to reconcile and she was not having it. So I'm supposed to. Be punished for the rest of my life because of something that was completely out of my control? Let's take a look at all of this a different way. Fornication is sex between unmarried people. First of all, what makes someone married in God's eyes? Is it sex? It's it commitment? Is it the legal marriage certificate? When does God consider you to be married? Alot of Christians say when you have sex with someone. If that's the case why is fornication even a thing? Technically if you're married after you have sex with anyone you're married to them and then you're an Adulterer if you have sex with someone else, right? No? OK so then why would anyone ever get married? No binding contract means that you can fornicate all you want until you choose to stop and commit to one person. You don't get married so no convinent, no attachments, then you can ask for forgiveness, perhaps even marry someone after you've had all your fun. Oh that's not the way it works? Why not? I could have chose not to marry and just fornicate and not be punished for life by having a failed marriage. Oh so I can remarry so long as my wife is no longer living? Good. I'll hire a hit man to bump her off, ask God's forgiveness for murdering her, then move on to marry someone else. I'll sin only once by commiting murder vs. Everytime I have sex with someone else other than my ex. What did Jesus die for? Did he not die for our sins? Oh but adulterous relationships are reoccurring unrepentant sin, right? How is that different than sinning everyday with other sins that you commit without giving them a second thought? Sin is sin right? The weight of the sin is determined by its natural consequences, not by God. God sent Jesus to die to pay for His wrath against sin. So what am I saying? There are big translation errors in these passages of scripture, especially the NIV! Plus preachers are reading from the Bible with no context. However it seems that nobody wants to hear another side of this because so many Christians are self righteous and take this dogmatic view, and move on. Those of us who were divorced against our will are looking for someone to make this dogmatic view that we've been taught make sense. Let's finally make it make sense. If you're divorced, watch this: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aVY7S2UOd1s.htmlsi=BtR5uPF8T71IhNkQ
Pawson made a mistake at the beginning. He fails to acknowledge that the Church of England was historically founded on divorce and remarriage. Henry VIII broke from the Catholic church and started the Church of England precisely so he could divorce and remarry.
Pawson chose to speak on this subject concerning Henry VIII near the end of the video when he discusses how the Catholic Church deals with their members wanting divorce.
As much as I admire David’s teachings (above most others), I find his interpretation of the woman caught in adultery to be alarming, suggesting as he does, that Jesus “got her off on a technicality”. Worse still, that Jesus would otherwise have approved of her stoning. Surely, the episode demands far greater significance than implied by such an explanation? Surely it is pivotal to our understanding of the difference between the harsh legalism of the Old Testament Law and the grace and mercy of the New Testament? There seems to be an unusual amount of speculation in David’s explanation. About the test that the Jews were subjecting Jesus to. About what He wrote in the sand and the nature of the sin to which He referred. About the significance of the teaching of the Scribes and about Roman law at the time. It seems far more likely that the Jews were simply forcing Jesus to choose between upholding the law in all its harshness and standing by the mercy that He had been preaching. Cf. His many confrontations with the Jews over the Sabbath. If David's interpretation were correct, where else does Jesus tell us that the capital punishment prescribed by the Law for adultery and other serious sins is no longer appropriate? (as it remains for Sharia) The fact that Jesus Himself did not condemn the woman, does not indicate that God has gone soft on sin. He did not deny that she deserved to be stoned to death. On the contrary, he was in effect telling us that apart from God’s mercy, we too ought to be stoned to death. Hence, we too ought to “go and sin no more". The interpretation of this passage impacts upon Matthew 19. When asked if there was any justification for divorce at all, Jesus concluded, “what God has joined, let not man put asunder”. Refusing to take “no” for an answer, the Jews re-framed their question around the law of Moses. The critical point here (that we have difficulty getting our head around) is that the concessions made by Moses excluded adultery, because one cannot divorce a dead (executed) spouse. It is therefore entirely reasonable to conclude that the so called exception clause, must instead be an exclusion/exemption clause. Ie. That Jesus is indicating that His response was/is not applicable to cases of adultery. The conventional “exception” explanation has the following difficulties. Jesus would be contradicting the comprehensive “no exception” statement He had just made, not to mention the no exception passages elsewhere. He could have been accused of speaking against the Law, for permitting divorce in place of capital punishment. (There-by “being soft on sin") It is reasonable and understandable that Jesus would prefer to deal with the special case of adultery as a separate issue, apart from divorce. Such as He did in the case of the “woman caught in adultery”. As for the distinction between “fornication” and “adultery”, an exclusion clause would need to encompass any sexual sins punishable by death. (Because divorce would be irrelevant in all such cases) There is at least one other class of sexual perversion which fell into this category, which would explain why Jesus would use a more general term such as “fornication”. I'm disappointed that David does not reference this alternative explanation in his videos. It requires minimal extrapolation/adaptation as compared to the betrothal explanation. He himself acknowledges the work of Dr Leslie McFall in the 2013 revision of his book. After appearing to accept Dr McFall’s identification of a critical error which Erasmus introduced into the Greek text to facilitate an “exception” interpretation, David still rejects Dr McFall’s exemption explanation, without appearing to have any particular reason. I note in closing that a few Bibles correct the Erasmus error including the New Jerusalem (Catholic), Darby and Orthodox Jewish.
@@ajlouviere202 I try to take them seriously. Especially at desperate times such as these. (Luke 6:46-49) No-one appears to have "fact checked" me as yet? Do you?
@@60sfanatic I agree that the exception clause was an exclusion for issuing of a certificate of divorce. Jesus is clearly stating that the Moses's precept (issuing a certificate of divorce to become another man's wife) was for any cause except fornication, which was due to the law in Deuteronomy 22:13-21.
@@60sfanatic the divorce and remarriage for adultery doctrine is based solely on the supposed guilt of the wife in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. However, the wife, in the above scriptures, is clearly not guilty of fornication because the Jews (that Jesus was speaking to) were still living under the law, and if fornication was discovered, there was a moral obligation to report the offender according to Deuteronomy 22:13-24. The wife, who would have been found guilty of fornication, was subsequently stoned to death, according to the law, which had still governed the Jews up until Christ's death on the cross. The same for a woman caught in adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10. How could a wife, guilty of fornication, or adultery, under the law of Moses, be given a writing of divorcement and be caused to commit adultery with whosoever marries her, that is divorced? Jesus is clear, in these examples, that the wife is not guilty of fornication, but is still caused to commit adultery if she marries another man now that she is divorced. This is the only way that Matthew 5:31-32, and Matthew 19:9 keep harmony with Romans 7:2-3, and 1 Corinthians 7:39. Unlike the synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, which were written to evangelize the Gentiles, Matthew was written to the Jews, and has of 24 characteristics that identify it as intended for the house of Israel. The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death. The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. Christ's death on the cross caused the Jews to become dead to the law of Moses, so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the ordinances of law of Moses as justification, over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the ordinances of the law is no longer possible, for Israel, and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15. Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife. Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned, by an unbelieving spouse, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way some translations word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not enslaved" which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, which is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 shows the Apostle Paul giving those who are abandoned permission to remarry, do not understand the command that Christ gives is to an abandoned husband, in 1 Corinthians 7:11, and that he "must not divorce" his wife, and his wife is commanded to "remain unmarried or else be reconciled" to her husband. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh, due to one's unbelief, puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, and himself, by implying that Paul has issued an opposing command to verses 10-14 in verse 15. Some also teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16. The Jewish couples in ancient Israel, who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death, either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with verses 25-26 speaking exclusively to men that have never married. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly in regard to virgin women who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is speaking of a virgin who has become of age to bear children when it says, "let them marry." This is a clear command, to a single man, who has taken a virgin to be his wife. Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring again to the single man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged), under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which again means single men, in the congregation, who have betrothed a wife, do well if they marry, and those who choose not to marry their virgin brides do better, under the current climate. For more proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unscriptural unions. The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24. Mark 10:1-12 and Matthew 19:1-12 both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans, and likewise Luke to evangelize the Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching. Please use wisdom when living in any situation against what the scriptures command.
This teaching is okay but I have an issue with abusive marriages especially physical abuse in the church. In 1994, i had to advise a certain woman to leave her home due to unending battery (in Africa adultery is not a big enough issue for a woman to leave her marriage). She reported me to her Vicar who reprimanded me severely. She continued in her home and was later poisoned by her husband's mistress. I went to her burial to mock the Vicar.
I don't know where I stand on this issue, especially about leaving your second marriage. I think there is an alternative though, if both spouses can agree on it. The option is to not have sex any more with each other but stay together. Be like roommates. I think that is the better than filing yet another divorce. Most divorced couples have remarried so going back to their former partner is not an option biblically. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution but I still think it's far better then divorcing the second partner. If you slip up from time to time and do have sex, repent and don't do it again. Ask God to give you both the strength keep from doing it. I think if a remarried couple are living in the same house but not having sex, they're not committing adultery under Dave's interpretation. The one downside of this is the temptation, you're kind of putting yourself In harm's way if he is correct. I married a woman who was divorced, so that puts me in the same camp is a lot of you. This, however, can open a whole separate can of worms. What is the definition of a marriage? Is it having sex? Is it having a marriage license issued by the state? Personally, I believe that you can stay in the second marriage and have sex and you're not sinning as long as you've repented of your previous divorce and stay in your current one, but I could be wrong. Edit: Actually, I think I agree with John Piper about remarriage: www.desiringgod.org/articles/divorce-and-remarriage-a-position-paper
Steve W I agree with you about believing as John Piper does in this paper. He has an answer to those of us who are already remarried. I thought I would need to divorce my husband and live as single !! No one else seems to give an answer to us remarrieds. But I do agree with him about what he says about future divorces and remarriages. Jesus forbid it, because the husband is a type of Christ and the wife as the bride of Christ. Marriage covenant is very solemn to enter into. It is binding until death. I don’t know why in the world I have been married 21 years now and never heard about the sin of remarriage before now.
Adultery in the heart with another while your covenant spouse is still alive is still adultery. Only a complete separation is repentance according to the word when it comes to one flesh.
Here is part of the problem staying with your second marriage, even if you only have sex once in a while and repent. How can you truly be remorseful and turn from your sin, knowing you are going to do it again since you are still putting yourself in temptation? The other interesting question is: if you know divorce is wrong and God does not see your first marriage as dissolved, you go marry another spouse...then you are married in the eyes of man only. But in the eyes of God you are in a forbidden relationship, you are still married to your first spouse and just committing habitual adultery with another person. So in the eyes of man you would need a divorce to leave the second spouse. But in the eyes of God you were never married, you are just living in sin. So if the second spouse was not married before they were living in sin with you, then they would need to repent and turn their life around. But I believe they Would be able to marry again because technically they were never married to begin with. At least in the eyes of God, not in the eyed of man. I think all believers really need to look long and hard about divorce and remarriage. I believe God is calling us to more holiness, we are a very sinful generation that seeks to satisfy our flesh first before being obedient to God. As I was told by someone I love, remarriage can't be wrong because then there are too many Christians going to hell. He is banking his salvation on that God won't send him to hell for doing what so many others are doing. As if God would say, you are right, there are too many of you going to hell for this...I will change my mind or there won't be many believers in heaven. But the bible says the road to heaven is very narrow and few find it....that should be sobering. What God showed me, is that marriage is taking a covenant oath before God to be with this person till death, the holy spirit is witness at your marriage and you and your spouse are knit together as one, no longer two. He showed me my daughter and said, how would you as a human pull your daughter apart and make your husband and you again? In other words, our children are a representation in the physical of what happens in the spiritual. We become one and there is no way to separate us from our spouse, only God can and it requires death. Sex doesn't make us married, a license from the states doesn't...it is God that does and we (man) cannot seperate what He put together.
@@shellic5374 you have spoken well, and are correct. The second marriage was adultery even before it became legal. Even thinking of someone's husband or wife romantically is adultery which is why Matthew 7:13-14 says few find the kingdome.
Interesting read , thank you for sharing John Piper .I personally found a revelation in 1 corinthians 8 and 10 which solves everything food, drinking and Divorce . Our actions should not cause those with little faith to stumble in accepting the works of Jesus Christ. In short our Grace, Shouldn't cause our children or new believers to sin.
You have to understand the heart ♥️ of God to understand the scriptures and interpret them correctly. Religious people cannot interpret scripture correctly (I know bc I used to be religious). I have listened to SOOOOOO many messages on this subject and EVERY person has a different spin on the subject. ((And no I'm not divorced or remarried)). God bless the people who have been divorced...may God give you HIS peace.
It is simply a matter of acceptance. Not all can receive the truth as Jesus said. Those that seek truth and righteousness have that revealed to them and those who choose to follow their lusts will have the truth hidden from them.
@@gecko499 you quotrf malachi 2:16 as if all people who are divorced couldnt possibly be blessed by God. Ezra proves that God permits in certain cases ppl to be divorced, and if he permits it then they those divorced ppl can be blessed. That is the heart of God. And not all remarriage is sin . scripture is clear , you only derive to this conclusion by imposing assumptions on the text, like divorce is ontologically impossible, the whole of scripture doesnt agree with this but ppl just impose it. Question. Are you perfect or trying to be perfect like Jesus commanded ?
@@gecko499 so where fornication is involved , there is no adultery when that justly divorced person gets remarried. Thank you. Not all remarriages are adultery. So you then must still sin because you are looking to scripture to justify not being perfect like Jesus commands. You must be of the devil , sinner. You lost credibility right there
@@gecko499 Im sorry , i was wrong on characterizing your position. I agree with you that not all remarriages are adultery. I believe that you should not divorce and you should not remarry, i also believe there are special exceptions to those rules and that they cannot be used for loopholes for God knows your heart. I disagree however that God would command the impossible. That is not the God of the bible. If He commanded us, we must do it, dont say you cant , you mean you dont or you wont, but if you say you cant that makes God a liar.
1:28:32-1:31:28 ❗️HELP PLEASE❗️ According to this teaching-- if A/B were divorced, and now B is married to C, the right thing to do now is for B/C to separate right? ❓My question is: Is it the right thing for B to get back with A again even if A had been married to some else as well? -- Can anyone help with this? 🥹🙏🏻
Hello mr. Pawson. I had a question about your view on the word "porneia". I heard an explaination that refutes the "fornication" definition by quoting, among others, Jer. 3:6, Ez. 16:23 from the Septuagint as also being translated as "porneia". While God is clearly married, in the analogy, to Israel. My wife wants to use sexual immorality as an umbrella-term to justify her divorcing me, and I'm really concerned about that. I know this video was posted 9 years ago, but I hope and pray that you will see my comment, and want to respond to it. Godd bless you!
Hi Benjamin what exactly is your quesiton ? We have the position Moses took regarding permitting divorce which is acknowledged by Jesus who then states it was not Gods intention Jesus acknoledges the Jewish tradition regarding pornea but HE does not endorse it - rather Jesus teaching on marriage is clear that,marriage is a covenant for life , and if anyone divoces and remarries - it is adultery We also have to consider there may be grounds for divoce, that does not grant release and freedom to remarry - or that is an act of Adultary If we go back to Moses - Moses permitted divorce but ......and this is an important consideration - Moses insisted a man issues a "certificate of divorce" listing the grounds for divoice - if a Man listed adultary..... that condemed his wife to death by stoning - no exception. By listing adultary and condeming his wife to death a man was in effect murdering his wife, and murder was itself punishable by death as both Murder and Adultary are forbidden by the 10 commandments - Solomon was asked to judge a situation where two mothers claimed ownership of teh same baby. What did he say ? - cut the baby in half! ......not because that is rights and proper way to settle this .........but because it would immediately identify the true monther In a similar act of wisdom - by permitting divoce through the issuing of a Certificate of Divorce, Moses was acting wisely - a man would have to think twice before issuing a cerfificate of divorce, as he would be breaking the 10 commandments by condeming his wife to death .......Divorce does not bring an ending to the marriage covenant in Gods eyes
However compelling one's case for remarriage may be, only scripture has the final authority. I have not yet found one verse that clearly legalizes remarriage. The only remarried person mentioned in the New Testament was King Herod.
Actually not true. Moses was remarried to an Ethiopian women. This is why Hermenuetics is so important we have to go to the original Greek, and Hebrew. We must remember the culture Jesus was talking to. The Jewish culture was divorcing left and right. The pharisees and saducees, were permitting a woman to be put away for making bread wrong, etc, etc, etc.
Ron, if we are going to use Moses as an example of divorce and remarriage, by which scriptures do we know that 1) Moses divorced his first wife, Zipporah, and 2) that Zipporah was still alive when Moses "remarried"? I cannot find anything written that assures me of either condition. Am I missing something here? Thanks and blessings.
Philip your missing the point here. We are not trying to reproduce what was going on in the Jewish culture. That is not applicable to us today, if it was we would still have to follow all the Jewish traditions and laws. Yes, there are guiding principles and lessons to be learned. Not everything though can translate over. Certain things applied only to a certain culture, time period, and certain events. You do realize in the Bible that women had no rights in the New Testament right? The husbands controlled everything. Read my response below. Women were not allowed to be in ministry. We do not see any women teaching in the temples or synagogues. That would have been exercising authority over men. Yet Paul uses women in many ways in his ministry, breaking Jewish tradition. Today women have all kinds of rights. If we followed the Jewish culture, they would still have non. So as a society are we sinning against God because women have rights where at that period in history they did not?
@@messiahswordsfirst6992 Numbers 12:1 and the reference to Moses’ marriage to the Cushite, or Ethiopian. It is possible, though not probable, that the Cushite is Zipporah. Arguing against that possibility are two facts: 1) the link between Midianites and Ethiopians is very difficult to trace convincingly; and 2) the objection to the marriage raised by Miriam and Aaron seems to indicate a recent event. Moses and Zipporah would have been married for over 40 years by this time, and it is unlikely that Moses’ siblings would just then be protesting. Much more likely is that Zipporah had died (although her death is not recorded in Scripture) and that Moses had remarried. Some see in Moses’ marriages to two Gentiles as prefiguring the gospel message going into all the world, blessing even the Gentiles (see Acts 1:8). Zipporah the Midianite was related to the Israelites but only through Abraham’s son by a concubine (Genesis 25:1-2); the Cushite was farther removed from the lineage of Israel. Moses’ marriages expanded in a widening circle into the Gentile world, helping to show that in Abraham’s seed all the nations of the world would be blessed (Genesis 12:3).
@Ron Polson: Thanks, Ron; I appreciate your reply. I am thinking that there is a lot we don't know about Zipporah. We also don't know how long Moses and Miriam had been reunited before the complaints against Moses' wife began. But that does not stop some folks (not yourself) from insisting that Moses divorced his covenant wife and married this unnamed "Ethiopian" woman while Zipporah was still alive. Of course, nobody can show how Moses found an unwed Ethiopian woman while simultaneously leading God's people in the wilderness! (Mail-order bride, perhaps?) Awful lot suppositions employed by those folks in order to make Moses a divorcee, methinks... Blessings to you, brother!
What about the case of King David and Bathsheba? David not only committed adultery but also murder. Yet God restored him and forgave him even though he continued to love with Bathsheba and had a child by her who was King Solomon. I have made some bad choices in my life and find myself in the very situation that this preacher describes. Is there no hope for me?
Kevin Smith yes much hope. I was divorced and remarried years later. I have been blessed of the Lord ever since. Sometimes it comes to divorce. Learn from it and go forward
That was before jesus he didn't have god himself come down tell him that was a sin, David knew of his sin that make him kill a righteous man because of that, the apostle paul said as long the husband is alive the wife is bound by the law and if she married an other she lives in adultary the same goes for the man
Somebody in the above comments said "I don't want to be the reason my wife goes to hell". The yoke of Jesus is easy and HIS burden is light...that's too much of a burden to carry for a human being. Thank God for the blood of Jesus. Bless the hearts of all the people that have experienced divorce...I pray God himself gives you clarity and PEACE!
David's example is not a good example. He also killed Bathsheba's husband. Has anyone citing David's case also done that? The times of David was a time when people lived without grace. These stories were recorded so that us as adopted children of God can learn from their mistakes without doing them! They weren't written so we can look for examples to pattern our lives after. The only person we are to pattern our lives after in faith is Jesus. This is why churches will do well if they begin to explain this topic very well to congregations. Marriage is a very delicate issue. If you are just getting to know this, don't just rush into what David is saying. Seek out to God to help. Your case might be different from God's perspective like that of David. But you don't sit there looking for an excuse if your conscience points to God's Word. Rather, take the word and pray about it. The Lord is forgiven of days of ignorance. He can dissolve a marriage, He can build up broken ones but the first thing is to promise to go with what the Word says not what some in the comment sections are saying. Most are emotional people trying to blur the Word of God with their feelings. Seek the Lord knowing this truth now.
King David was free to marry Bathsheba as she was a widow - great repentance was required from King David, see Psalm 51 where he is repenting after the prophet Nathan rebukes him. David and Bathsheba lost their first child who was conceived during their adultery....see 2 Samuel 12:13-23. I divorced my husband and even legally changed my name to my maiden name. I was taken in sinfully and ignorantly by the so-called 'exception clause' in Matthew (not there in Mark or Luke!) That 'except for fornication' was only there for the Jews who would have misjudged Joseph, wife of Mary, whereas he was a 'just man.' My husband has since made a civil marriage with woman. I shall live singly until he dies, otherwise I would make myself an adulteress. Everyone must seek the Lord for him/herself, that is your hope Kevin (your church may not teach this). The Lord will reveal His truth to humble hearts individually. Pray and wait on the Lord. Don't learn the hard way like i did.
Is David Pawson teaching that even if the married couple divorced, they remained married in God's eyes? And if the husband remarried and hv children, n IF he wanted to divorce the 2nd wife, God would approve...becos in God's eyes he was still the husband of the 1st wife...they never were divorced in God's eyes? Moses said this remarrying the 1st wife was a detestable thing in God's sight
Hi that is not what David teaches is the Biblical position God would not have approved of the second marriage which, if the 1st wife is still alive, is adultery - the Bible teaches that remarriage after divorce is adultery unless the 1st marriage ended through the death of a partner. Is marriage a contract that can be broken or a covenant which is only broken through death of one party ? David is not teaching that the Bible says 'he should divorce his 2nd wife' nor is David teaching ''God would approve''........ If this is real situation you are describing it is a really sad and complex position to be in. The Husband, as a Father, certainly now has a responsibility to his Children In this situation. I suggest the husband repents of his position and seeks Gods advice on what is the right thing to do - two wrongs dont make a right, but there are biblical references that the divorce did not give the husband the right to remarry
Nowadays, people who preach that way are not wanted in the churches. Our pastor is divorced, has had 2 open relationships, and who knows how many more we don't know about. One woman lives in his house now - they are not married. And if people in the church say something about it, it is condemned strictly because "WE LIVE UNDER THE GRACE"...
Hi Scott. This is Steve on behalf of David This is not about whether one sin is greater than another....... it’s about whether Remarriage after Divorce is a sin ..... or not ........and those who take time to study Gods word can decide for themselves 1 John 3 vs 7 to 10 and vs 8”9 says “no one born of God will continue to sin “ Hebrews 10:26 says if we keep on sinning GOD cannot forgive us ..... so it’s quite simple really ..... the question is whether Remarriage after divorce a sin ..........? ....And that’s a question we all need to ask ourselves and seek Gods word to find the answer ........ ...... it’s not what David Pawson says that matters ...... but it is what GODs word says that counts
Once we REPENT of it and stop doing it, yes. Most people want God to forgive them for taking their neightbor's wife and, after a few tears, to legitimize the spouse theft with a God-bound marriage. What of the first and true husband or wife? They are to be told by God that really the rule is "finders' keepers" and the legal divorce simply forces God to unbind the true first marriage. Now unbound, the freed wife or husband will be rewarded with a new, God-bound marriage. There is no way for God to forgive adultery in second marriage while a first spouse lives until that false second marriage is ended.
"Ask for forgviness" for taking another man's wife, cry a few tears, then go right back to committing sexual adultery with her? I can't find the repentence in that pattern of behavior, can anyone else? Also, God did not join you in your second marriage, so there is nothing other than your legal bond break up. Staying in this false marriage is continuous adultery.
@@philarevolutionarywarriorp8295 Until you repent of a sin, you are still doing the sin. This works especially when you are conned by a preacher into a false marriage, (CALLED ADULTERY BY JESUS) and then cry a bit at the fact that you cheated your first spouse, are cheating your present, but false spouse out of a true marriage, and are encouraging others to sin in the same way. You will likely die in your sin as God clearly never joined you, else your second marriage while a first spouse lives would be a true one, and not called adultery. It is very simple. If you have a living first spouse, you are married, whether you committed the sin of divorcing or your spouse divorced you. You are stuck for life, which is exactly what you wanted and askd for on your wedding day. "For better or worse, until death do we part" means exactly that.
@First Lady Sims not exactly. What condemns is when people ignore the clear teachings and commands of Christ. For example, what was commanded by Christ, for those who are married, who abandon their covenant spouse, and those who are abandoned by their covenant spouse, is addressed in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. Christ is issuing a clear command to an abandoned husband that he "must not divorce" his wife, and to the wife abandoning him to "remain unmarried or be reconciled" to her husband, in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. This makes what some believe is Paul overriding Christ's command, in 1 Corinthians 7:15, and giving an abandoned covenant spouse permission to divorce their covenant spouse and marry someone else, an impossibility. This puts Paul directly at odds with Christ, which makes it clear that 1 Corinthians 7:15 (which does not use the terms divorce or marry another) is not referring to divorce, only to separation (which is written in the original Greek texts), and could not possibly be an allowance for divorce, or remarriage, since that would violate the commands and teachings previously given in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. Unbelievers, who are married to believers, are sanctified by the covenant of marriage (one-flesh), along with their children, is seen in 1 Corinthians 7:12-14.
What about Christian couples that were sleeping together before marriage then felt convicted and were married. This is very common in Christian churches. Are they forgiven ? Does getting married to the person they were sinning with = repentance?
Firstly what you are describing is not Adultery but more fornication Sex before marriage may not please God who created the bond of marriage it is inconsistent with the nature of sex, the nature of marriage, and the nature of the family. Marriage is a covenant bond between a man and woman (Mal. 2:14), a covenantal bond sealed by the one flesh union of sexual intimacy. However if repent - turn away from, stop doing something, and if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness But do not carry on doing the "same thing"......... as there is no forgiveness for persistent and wilful disobedience Hebrews 10:26
I understand all of this as I have read the scripture many times but I have to wonder about young girls who are molested and abused. They aren't virgins, what about them? Who is their husband? What is the meaning of a true marriage in The Lord's eyes? I just believe that it is much deeper than what we even know. I'm not saying divorce is right and I actually think it is wrong but I have to wonder about many things concerning marriage/divorce...
Vows before God and witnesses make a marriage covenant between a never before married man and woman. Not sex. Otherwise adultery and fornication would not be sins.
Why is it that a fornicator has a better outcome than an adulterer? Sounds like if you want to sin a bunch with sex you should be a fornicator not an adulterer. I mean do you get the logic? Those who divorce HAVE NO OPTION any long in how to deal with their sexual desire that has been awakened. Paul tells young windows to marry lest they give into sexual sins. But what about the person who has a spouse who leaves them, and they have tasted and crave sex? I know the gospel is the answer here, which says power and deliverance. But damn, this is a hard word. It's like Jesus saying eat my flesh and drink my blood. Many people stopped following him then. Ouch! This is very serious stuff. Everyone where I live has committed adultery, and apparently still commit it!!! No one here believes this. This is scary for them!!!!! How does the gospel apply here????
@isaactamplin8905 Well, it has been years since I made that comment. I think if we follow the Lord close enough, HE will give us the answers. That's about all I can say on that. Good luck..keep praying 😊❤️
So the Greek translation is "fornication" and the definition fornication is: Sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other. So must the sexual act be "before marriage" or via the defined term "partners who are not married to each other".....???
That phrase Jesus spoke to the Pharisees was making reference to betrothed folks, those promised, but not yet formally, actually, Ketubah-signed married so that they could then consummate the marriage by sexual relations. If a man found his betrothed (promised, pledged) "wife" had been with another man (think Mary and Joseph before the angel explained things to Joseph) then the Jews had a rule that a man could divorce her. Well, Pawson is saying that Jesus was actually saying NOT EVEN FOR FORNICATION CAN YOU DIVORCE HER. Forgive, in other words, and get on with it. Makes forgiveness come to the forefront of seriousness, me thinks!
M E nope. The punishment for adultery is death. You don’t need to divorce a dead person. The problem is we can’t kill adulterous partners. God understood the drive for partnership. He also knew that someone who commits sexual sin may be forgiven, but not trustworthy. In order to free the innocent spouse to remarry, God said your former spouse should be put to death.
@@johnborland7865 did Jesus command the adulteress to be stoned according to the Law of Moses, or granted her forgiveness and instructed her to stop comitting adultery in John 8:11?
@@johnborland7865 he spoke to those who were without sin knowing that there were none. Then said, "Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." Has Jesus determined that sex outside of the one-flesh covenant of marriage is still adultery in John 8:11?
I agree that neither divorce nor remarriage is the unpardonable sin. I disagree, however, that one should leave the second marriage. It can be valid in God's eyes. We should repent of our divorce and remarriage by not ever doing it again. The first marriage, moreover, may not have been valid in God's eyes. I do not believe in a perpetual state of adultery. Willful and willing are the same thing. And grace is always there because GOD is ALWAYS faithful...even when we are not. A remarried person isn't supposed to go back to their first "spouse" after being with another person, either. I love my husband, and I repent of my past deeds, willful or not. I REPENT. I am sorrowful for all of my sins, for each one has led to another. For this reason, I allowed myself to be led astray by my own will. I believe God loves me and will bring to fruition the good works begun in me when I was drawn to Christ and received the Gospel I endure with faith, even though I am not worthy. Only the blood of the Lamb justifies me...and only God's mercy saves me.
Kristi You cannot be granted entry into Heaven until your known sins are forgiven. You cannot be forgiven of ANY sin until it is repented of first. These are the simple mathematics of God's economy. If you are remarried and your first husband is still alive, BY GOD'S DEFINITION, you are in an adulterous relationship and that this sin is current and actively being carried out. Repentance requires the sin to be stopped. This is an ABSOLUTE. Repentance is not simply being sorry for what you did in the past or even the origins of the present circumstance. So long as it's still going on, it's active and unrepentant....and by definition, will be exclusionary for admittance into the Kingdom. This doctrine from God affects me too and has caused considerable sadness. My feelings (or yours) don't change the rules. Like the good Pastor said, this is why making that original choice is so crucial to get right. Peace.
That is a terrible way to live and I am thankful that Jesus doesn't demand me to recollect every sin I've ever committed. The way you describe things, NO ONE would be able to enter into Heaven because just as it's impossible to not sin it's just as impossible to remember everything you've done from childhood whether they are good or bad things. Apart from Christ who has made our rags as white as snow, we will fail. But through Him and HIM ALONE, we have victory.
Scripture clearly teaches anyone who divorces and remarries while their covenant spouse is still living (with the exception of fornication) is an adulterer or adulteress (Matthew 5:31-32; Matthew 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18; Romans 7:2-3; 1 Corinthians 7:10-15; 1 Corinthians 7:39). Additionally, scripture clearly teaches in order to receive God's mercy one must repent or they won't inherit the kingdom of Heaven (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Luke 13:3). God saves anyone who genuinely repents. Repentance has two elements: Confessing AND forsaking our sins. Proverbs 28:13, says: "He who covers his sins will not prosper, but whoever confesses AND forsakes them will have mercy." Remaining in an adulterous remarriage is not repentance. The liar has to repent and stop lying; the thief has to repent and stop stealing; the homosexuals have to repent and stop committing homosexual acts; and the adulterers and adulteresses (including those in adulterous remarriages) must repent and stop committing adultery. Sharing the scriptural truth about divorce and remarriage infuriates people who are supposed to be followers of Christ. Jesus's words regarding this issue anger his alleged followers like no other topic. Perhaps, it's time to obey Jesus Christ, and to begin believing He means what He says. Most importantly, ALL sins are unforgivable without repentance...including remaining in adulterous remarriages. According to the clear, easy to understand words of scripture: Jesus most definitely sends unrepentant adulterers and adulteresses to hell.
Kristi, do you have the courge to honestly ask God if you live in an adultery marriage or not, being willing to accept any answer from Him and then do as He asks you?? I'm afraid you may be living in denial and you may even feel in your heart that you are doing something wrong, but you prefer to lie to yourself because you like having a family and being loved by a husband. But denial will not get you in the Kingdom. Be very careful and don't play with God.
@@gecko499 That's a wonderful example, because it goes to show the heart of the one who knows his debts are paid. "I want to make right to those I hurt along the way." Thanks for sharing that scripture!
Actually “this guy” misses the boat entirely with his reference to what he calls. “The Church “. Many factions, gross errors purported as truth, destructive heresies which were prophesied to come, and did. Don’t mention that when you’re trying to sell a book, just say the all exclusive the church.
I see a lot of people still justifying themselves thinking they can remarry. Plus I see a lot of people commenting that asking if divorce is a sin no it is not. Divorce was allowed because of Hardness of Heart even having a hard heart is not a sin period it leads to sin. What is the Sin is when they have sex together that is adultery because you're becoming one with somebody else. Jesus address this in Matthew 19 10 11 and 12 I've confronted many people on the issue of divorce period And I asked them to explain those Bible verses and they refused they take a black marker to those Bible verses because they show their motive of why they cannot accept what the Bible says because they're not willing to give up sex
Can give me one example of someone leaving their husband or wife to follow Jesus? In other words , where’s the uproar in scripture? If the Apostles were teaching that remarried people are in continuous adultery, where do we see this in scripture? Where do we see divorcing if remarried equals repentance? Sincerely.
@@rightreasons7908 God bless, these are sensitive and difficult subjects and have to be approached with much humility. No one is trying to Lord over you or anyone, but it's important to be faithful to what the Lord has said clearly on this subject. Mark 10:2-12 And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” 3 He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” 4 They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” 5 And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7 ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife,[a] 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” Genesis, Proverbs, the Prophets, the Gospels and the Pauline epistles all point that marriage is intended by God as a lifelong convenant, and that remarriage is a sin. (Some in the 16th century began to teach that the "exception clause" in Mat. 19 gives license to remarry in the case of porneia but this is inaccurate). On the question of what to do if one in a second marriage already. Scripture doesnt address this issue directly other than saying it's an legitimate union in Gods. God is calling us to have a radically different view of marriage than the world, a vision of marriage that emulates and demonstrates Christs eternal love for the Church. The foundation of which is life long commitment, priority of sacrifice and reconciliation. Satan has really succeeded in attacking the foundations of marriage in the US and even alot of the Church, but I am praying for a revival of Godly Christian marriage and teaching on marriage for this generation. We need to humble ourselves and cry out to God that He would save and preserve our Marriages, that we might love the wife of our youth. God bless
There are many coming to the knowledge of the truth about this topic, but David Pawson is certainly one of the first to warn others about the eternal dangers of marriage after a divorce.
@@rightreasons7908 the divorce and remarriage for adultery doctrine is based solely on the supposed guilt of the wife in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. However, the wife, in the above scriptures, is clearly not guilty of fornication because the Jews (that Jesus was speaking to) were still living under the law, and if fornication was discovered, there was a moral obligation to report the offender according to Deuteronomy 22:13-24. The wife, who would have been found guilty of fornication, was subsequently stoned to death, according to the law, which had still governed the Jews up until Christ's death on the cross. The same for a woman caught in adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10. How could a wife, guilty of fornication, or adultery, under the law of Moses, be given a writing of divorcement and be caused to commit adultery with whosoever marries her, that is divorced? Jesus is clear, in these examples, that the wife is not guilty of fornication, but is still caused to commit adultery if she marries another man now that she is divorced. This is the only way that Matthew 5:31-32, and Matthew 19:9 keep harmony with Romans 7:2-3, and 1 Corinthians 7:39. Unlike the synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, which were written to evangelize the Gentiles, Matthew was written to the Jews, and has of 24 characteristics that identify it as intended for the house of Israel. The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death. The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. Christ's death on the cross caused the Jews to become dead to the law of Moses, so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the ordinances of law of Moses as justification, over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the ordinances of the law is no longer possible, for Israel, and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15. Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife. Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned, by an unbelieving spouse, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way some translations word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not enslaved" which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, which is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 shows the Apostle Paul giving those who are abandoned permission to remarry, do not understand the command that Christ gives is to an abandoned husband, in 1 Corinthians 7:11, and that he "must not divorce" his wife, and his wife is commanded to "remain unmarried or else be reconciled" to her husband. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh, due to one's unbelief, puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, and himself, by implying that Paul has issued an opposing command to verses 10-14 in verse 15. Some also teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16. The Jewish couples in ancient Israel, who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death, either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with verses 25-26 speaking exclusively to men that have never married. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly in regard to virgin women who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is speaking of a virgin who has become of age to bear children when it says, "let them marry." This is a clear command, to a single man, who has taken a virgin to be his wife. Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring again to the single man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged), under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which again means single men, in the congregation, who have betrothed a wife, do well if they marry, and those who choose not to marry their virgin brides do better, under the current climate. For more proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unscriptural unions. The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24. Mark 10:1-12 and Matthew 19:1-12 both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans, and likewise Luke to evangelize the Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching. Please use wisdom when living in any situation against what the scriptures command.
Well folks, im not a perfect man, I make mistakes I need forgiveness and grace often. However I never slept with another women, I never abused my wife and I always provided for my wife. I made mistakes and asked forgiveness for my contributions. I was also held to my "For better or for worse" vow. At the age of 32 (my age now) my wife "I am not happy, I want a divorce so I can grow", "I don't agree with your Christian values i.e abortion etc", " I will never be the obedient christian wife you want me to be". So now here I am facing a life of singleness all because someone out of per selfishness, threw me away like a garbage wrapper. Why in the KJV version for 1 corinthians 7:15 is the average person going to take the phrase in english then go reverse in the translation to Greek then back to english again. How is the average person reading their bible going to come to conclusion oh "under bondage" better look at the greek translation here. Why would God make it that complicated. How would someone know "when to go back and get a Greek and Hebrew" true meaning. Ill be honest I don't know what to think.. If this is true sometimes im just here waiting to die at that point.. dreams crushed, useless. I didn't want divorce, I never filing I tried my best, I pray and still do but man it takes 2 to make a marriage work only 1 to break it.
Hey James, I can relate to that. Went through my own version of that 10 years+ back, and it was deeply painful. First, I will pray for you. Second, stay close to God, read His word, let Him speak to you over time. Don't rush. God has a track record of picking up the broken, using the discarded, seeing as something special what others have overlooked, kicked about, undervalued. He is always faithful, always just, always true, and He is merciful to an extent beyond our imaginations. Ultimately, you will need to work it out with God. My take is to look at scripture and what it says about relationships and marriage in general, not merely explicit references to divorce. Context does matter. For example, the tragedy of divorce is not limited to the official tearing up of a legal form, but everything that has rolled along to reach that point, and not just the snapping of a single branch, but as a falling tree tears those around it, so because we aren't islands, divorce affects way more than 2 people. God hates divorce but that's far more than how our society sees it, I think. But The Bible acknowleges that hearts are hard, that people sin, that injustice happens, that a faithless wife or husband will leave their other half, that parents walk out on their kids. The family tree of Jesus is a tale of messed up relationships and damaged people and Jesus came, full of grace and truth, understanding us 100% and combining justice and mercy. God's plan is ordinarily marriage. He's made us for relationship with Him and each other. He hates divorce. Read in Numbers, how He does not allow divorced women who have remarried to return to their original husband. He doesn't ban that remarriage because He understands our need for companionship, for survival, for someone to love and care for and be loved by. Look at the provision Paul allows for young widows, for not forcing the unbelieving soouse to stay in the marriage, look at the idea that it is better to marry than burn with lust, and the understanding that singleness is not the calling for everyone, and God's diagnosis in Genesis that it wss not good for man to be alone. If we marry an abuser, or someone who leaves us, we get told the old lie that is fuel to many an affair, that it takes 2. No. What you said is right and I've said it myself. 2 to make it work but just 1 to destroy it. Otherwise it's like attaching guilt to every victim, like some bullied child of a psycho is in any way to blame, or every rape victim was at fault in some way. Ridiculous and unbiblical, and not in character with God. The most God-ly man I've met, who led me to Christ and discipled a generation of us was my friend's dad, married and present, having years before been discarded and left broken and empty. I met him through my friend- born of that remarriage. His remarriage gave life to a family, to a series of churches, had deep respect for marriage and brought not only glory, but many people to the Lord. Whether remarriage is right for you or me one day, only God knows, but let us listen to Him first, and remember that His love, grace and understanding are far deeper than our own.
@@tommarshall7247 God Bless you Tom, thanks for your reply. I enjoyed reading your response. Ya I find myself struggling to see a great future sometimes. It really is something in my opinion you don't know what it's like till you have gone through it yourself. Sometimes you just look at the whole situation and your like how is this Justice you know. Like where is the fairness and Justice here. I want to be obedient and that's why I'm studying.. I hope we can both find our answers @Tom
@@tommarshall7247 i know I’m 2 years late, but you spoke such Biblical common sense. You have enabled me to see relationships as a whole. Many thanks 🙏
@@Lakeslover1 Thank you. I'm surprised I wrote all that. But I think that common sense does matter a lot- after all, we're meant to love the Lord with all our minds. Reading Matthew 5, 6, 7, etc, it seems that Jesus doesn't want people to follow rules to tick boxes, but to think about why the rules are there, too and see the heart behind them. E.g. you could tick boxes by following Paul's teaching not to get drunk on wine, by smoking pot, instead- but you'd then be missing the point of the teaching! God bless you very much 🙂
many comments...i wondering how meny of the ones who applaud this teaching are Divorced or have a partner and not married or in the past were divorced.i just wondering 🤔
What if you married your second spouse while your 1st was still alive? Is this covenant you made the second time a valid, biblical promise that must be kept? Are you now married to 2 persons at once, thereby committing bigamy and condoning polygamy?
The first question is whether one accepts that whilst Jesus permitted divorce, he very much spoke out against remarriage - as he clearly stated this is adultery as the 1st Marriage as a covenant. Secondly not every one accepts but David did and so do I The next question is whether the person in concern was a christian when they divorced and remarried - ignorance is not a valid excuse but God will judge people on the measure of what they know not what you dont know - if you are a christian then you have the Bible to tell you what is wrong and what is right. It's a poor excuse not to seek the answers to life changing questions through reading the Bible. One can also not blame another for wrong advice. At the end of our days we will stand alone before our creator and be judged for what we have done. This does not change the current circumstances that one one has committed themselves to two people through marriage. What I would do is not to act in haste, to take time out and pray about the situation and seek the Lords guidance in what I should do - I would be reluctant to consult with others as only God will judge me for what I do and at the end of m days I cannot blame others if I do what they advise - Only God ultimately will be my judge about what the right thing to do and what is wrong. I would strongly recommend one seeks the Lord for Wisdom and guidance. When that wisdom comes - which I believe it will and it may or may not come quickly - one must act, whatever that answers says to do , as there is often no second chance. May God provide the answer to such difficult questions - not others as we are all sinners
Been single and divorced for 20 years. IMO, Pawson is correct. Question: Why does it seem that the Lord has blessed 2nd marriages? I'm surrounded by Christians who seemed blessed and happy. By judging their fruit, I would have to come to the conclusion that they are truly married and walking in God's grace.
God wont bless ongoing sin, there are always consequences to sin. King David paid 4 times(lost his first born, daughter was raped, son was murdered and other son tried to kill him and take the nation). 2nd marriages have higher divorce rates and kids are more likely to be abused.
Dr Finny Kuruvilla Harvard MD founder of Statler University Boston MA the exception is only an exception to make the woman commit adultery or the exception would have come at the end but instead followed up by and who marries the divorced innocent woman is committing adultery. Jesus disciples said if that is case between a man and his wife it is better not to marry. Same teaching as Dr Leslie McFall free online PDF
David Pawson is wrong on this issue. Jesus never said you are committing adultery if you remarry after divorce. In fact, Bible (Old Testament) teaches going back to former divorced spouse as committing adultery if she had married another man vise versa! Wrong translation by biased translators muddied the teaching of Jesus on divorce. Jesus said ground for divorce is if the spouse committed "evil" (sin), not 'sexual sin'. Also, Jesus emphasized terminating the marriage properly through 'divorce certificate.' Afterwards, you are free to remarry knowing that you should marry a believer who adheres to and follow the teachings of God and that God wants marriage to last forever.
I believe you are wrong on this issue. We are not under Mosaic Law, so Deuteronomy 24, which you are alluding to, is irrelevant. Also, Jesus clearly states in Mark and Luke that "whoever puts his wife away and marries another commits adultery." Paul also states in 1 Corinthians 10, that wives and husbands are not to divorce, but if they do, they are to remain single or reconcile with each other. God does all the marrying and will not remarry anyone with a living first spouse. God does not acknowledge Man's coorupt attempt to bypass His laws with their legal system.
Greek word the Lord used was 'evil' for the grounds for divorce not "adultery." God's intention was for married couple to be United forever, but if one or two are evil, that is ground for divorce. If you cannot understand this, you are judging millions of Christians who divorced because of this issue. Sadly enough there many mistakes translators made while translating the original Bible.
Also, we as Christians should follow many of the Mosaic laws, Ten Commandments is a good example. Dispensations has much flaws, don't buy into everything they say.
@@jaycho1255 No, it is not. The Pharisees state that Moses permitted them to give their wives a certificate of divorce. Jesus was not telling them to just get the paperwork right. Paul tells husbands "not to divorce their wives" in 1 Corinthians 7: 10. Wives are also not to leave their husbands, but if they do, they are to remain single or reconcile. I do not see any room for either husbands or wives to divorce each other, and certainly none to remarry, as God has to do the binding and will not bind two people, one or both of whom have a living first spouse.
This message is in the likeness and severity of, when Jesus said eat my flesh and drink my blood for the church today. And many left him troubled. Narrow is the way. I agree with this, but am so angry and dislike what I hear and wonder if it is the full truth of the matter, though I'll know. There is so many factors as to why in my own life this is difficult. None the less, a real sheep hears the shepherd.
I'm horrified at the idea that because of a distorted view of love is, that I in marrying and being divorced by a man of hate, am no longer allowed a second chance at redemption. I never knew my value and so I settled for one who was like the predator I was familiar with. I of course hope for reconciliation but the chances of that are not good at all, and he is likely to have already begun relations with another. I would love to experience what love is like with someone real and genuine, if God would permit it. Are we bound as well? Am I never to reproduce? It doesn't make sense. I can't control what he chooses to do and I will not try but ultimately is my job to be forever bound to him? It makes me feel trapped and scared, like I'll never be just God's but also that of this man, which was folly from the start. Is there no one here who understands my grief? Or are we all clapping at the sound of a room of shattered lives because this man sounds so righteous? I agree that what he says is as it ought to be, without a doubt, but it is not the world I've been raised in. I do think the matters of the heart is important. Do I want to be divorced from my ex-husband? Absolutely not. I desire for his redemption and to repent, as I did during it all, I will forever want that for him because that's how God has changed my heart but ultimately he left with hate in his heart. The attitude of his heart is stone cold, God nor I can make him change. I don't think I would be sinning if I'm blessed with another partner because my heart isn't cold, spiteful, or calculated toward revenge, which I think is what the law is supposed to be about. I think make it too much about the letter of the law rather than the Spirit of the law. Even as I say this, I do see and feel the line of connection. I know it will never go away. The break I felt wasn't the vow so much as it was the feeling of control and value, perhaps the mask of having a good marriage. My preference would be for God to reconcile and restore us no matter what has happened. But even still, what would you do if you were married to a pedophile? Would that be good for the children? I remember hating my mum for not standing up against my dad and wishing they would separate. I ran away from home. It must be nice for this pastor to live in a world of black and white and not live in a world of what actually goes on. This isn't Heaven so nothing will ever be as it should be.
Hi Jessica, I'm in the same boat as you. I married a man who married very young as she was pregnant. We were happily married and after I came across this sermon our lives have been ripped apart. Do we divorce? What happens to me, if God doesn't see our marriage, does that mean I can now find another spouse as I'm technically not in a covenant with anyone as my husband is still in a covenant with his 1st wife?
God can heal hurting marriages...(even resurrect dead marriages)...he can change your husband's heart for good. Please trust God and let Him take control of your marriage/life. He is a miracle worker and I've seen many marriages restored and healed which otherwise, were what people called it, impossible!
I understand your pain. I'm wondering what is now for me. A whirlwind is going on in me of rage! There are so many factors as to my situation of having been married and my spouse leaving me. One of the biggest factors is ABSOLUTELY NO ONE PERSON in my church or town that I know of has walked in never marrying again! This they teach you can... What the hell do I do? I cannot get back with my wife because she hates God, believes in her own God's/humanism, is married to another and hates me, hahahaha!!! Nor do I even want to marry her again, I did for a while want to work it out though. I didn't hear the gospel in his teaching at all about those who have fornicated or adultery-ed ( what's the past tense ?) , so where does the gospel play in this???? I have knowledge as to where and how. But I'm not sure this is the full truth of the matter. I agree with him but also disagree. I am in a whirlwind in myself about this....
I've been through deep grief like you by marriage to a hateful abusive predator. You're very fortunate no children were brought into that horror show. Me not so much. Here's my advice: Pray and trust the Lord, He'll hear you. It won't be easy. You need healing. If you rush to a new relationship, likely it will be even worse than the first. The cycle of abuse is very real. You're vulnerable in ways you can't fully grasp. The Lord can heal you, but it will be a process. Read Psalms like 16-19, 25, 27, 41, 69,103, 108. If the Lord wills you to marry, He'll make a way that accords to His law. Enjoy the gifts you do have. We're not promised or entitled to happiness. Don't be bitter at Pawson, he hasn't wronged you by giving a message you don't like. He's not saying you can't separate from an abuser, he's saying Jesus taught if you remarry you'll be in sin. PS it's not just that, you can do what you like but it won't be blessed, I've seen it countless times. God's laws actually protect us and help us. They're given out of His love and care for us, that's what you need to see.
Hello everyone. The church is truly in trouble because pastors fail to preach the truth surrounding divorce and remarriage. With that said, would someone please provide me with a pastor and or church who preached the truth about remarriage being a sin as long as your spouse is still alive? I would like for someone to provide me with churches in both America and Europe, preferably London. Thank you in advance.
