Divorce and Remarriage

David's book on this subject can be purchased from Amazon:
English US www.amazon.com/dp/B00564TNV2
English UK www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00564TNV2
Español www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1909886866
Português www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1911173049
Free resources and a library of Davids teachings are available from www.davidpawson.org
©️David Pawson Ministry CIO 2013

[@westgate5449]

This guy is awesome, and he sticks to the scriptures and never appeals to emotions.

[@adirafearsjesus7778]

just like derek prince

[@javierseuc7110]

Thats the Truth, thats the Life, snd that i s the Way

[@jesusislord3604]

He ignores the words. Makes it gender neutral The pronouns show the context

[@jesusislord3604]

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

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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)

[@nomsalebusa1790]

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.

[@raymondsiewert2720]

Glad the Providence of God brought me to watch this man ! He is very good and explains and expounds the Scriptures honestly and with truth .

[@guapitatessa]

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!!

[@clarissasamuel932]

Brilliant sermon provides a clear understanding of the subject based on scripture. God bless David Pawson.

[@justYouJesus1God]

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.

[@justYouJesus1God]

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.

[@justYouJesus1God]

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.

[@redeemed.and.restored]

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.

[@laurapiovan]

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...

[@laurapiovan]

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!

[@MichelaTah]

My dad in the Lord, I love his teachings

[@MrA2145]

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🙏

[@michaelchason9170]

Mine too

[@tivmego]

Thank you so so much pst.David. I can now further my studies on this *sticky* issue.

[@hopealivewithevang.olubunm2287]

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.

[@Tommaso77777]

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!

[@deh7712]

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.

[@originalmix2546]

absolutely...so far I enjoy David Pawson's sermons and of Warren B Smith...They both are true

[@gnial2001]

So much educative, informative and edifying. May God raise many teachers with the mantle of Dr Pawson.

[@thuriza11]

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.

[@cuddlesanddaisy]

Believers are the bride of Christ. When He returns to take us to the wedding, and we are found unfaithful, we can be put away. Remain faithful!

[@MeyerTribe7]

Amen

[@philipbuckley759]

this is probably the most straight forward and shocking statement that could be made, on this subject.....thanx...

[@dougr6269]

What would being unfaithful mean? What is the contract?

[@magalydeleon557]

@@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.”

[@magalydeleon557]

@@In2theLight many Lukewarm churches talk less about sin in order to keep there seats and pockets full. Harsh but true.

[@Elaishar]

Rightly dividing the word of truth. Thank you sir.

[@cristianobeloved]

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?

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

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

[@sounddoctrine3032]

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‼‼

[@jenna338]

AMEN!!! GLORY TO GOD FOR THIS MAN TELLING THE TRUTH WHEN MOST OTHERS WONT!!

[@davidshort2345]

Thank you very much for speaking the truth about this controversial and misinterpreted matter.

[@DavidAAriellesen]

Wonderful godly message! God bless you, David Pawson! 🙏🥰

[@johnnymayhugh3250]

What a great teacher!

[@missasinenomine]

Amen!

[@MoonPhaze5]

I love how he calls out the hypocritical evangelicals. ✊😲 GO MR. PAWSON!!!

[@philipbuckley759]

it is so engrained, in the system, that sometimes it is the Pastors, as much as the individuals...

[@beetledune9264]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

Sad but true.

[@punishednomorefreetoprotec2165]

100%

[@dama4533]

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 🙏

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

👍

[@gwebb409]

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

[@alsontaylor6080]

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]

This teaching should lead you to repentance, not despair.

[@tommarshall7247]

@@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.

[@isaactamplin8905]

​@@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

[@thobilesunflower9295]

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.

[@humilulo]

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?

[@ajlouviere202]

@@humilulo where do you see David Pawson doing what you are accusing him of?

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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?

[@humilulo]

@@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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@humilulo the better question is how Deuteronomic law fits into the new covenant, according to Hebrews 8:7-13?

[@rockiie2172]

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.

[@healingypsy]

Simply beautiful beautiful explanation of Jesus writing on the sand

[@blessedbyyah2939]

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

[@crwnofenlightenment]

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.

[@missinsanelogic]

This perpetual marriage is a very very popular stance to have

[@truthtellermom462]

Amen

[@humilulo]

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.

[@rockiie2172]

@@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.

[@betherealdeal]

Jesus teachings WILL offend people. If it does not stir your soul your life and calls you to repentance. Chances are you’re in a wrong path

[@stevenjames1951]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@stevenjames1951 have you read 1 Corinthians 6:9-10?

[@JodiRaeRandaCastleRockRealtor]

Truth, True repentance= being sorry enough to stop.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@JodiRaeRandaCastleRockRealtor amen!

[@rhondae8222]

@@stevenjames1951 , You are wrong. You need to repent and ask God, the Lord Jesus Christ, to forgive you for your sins and to save you from his wrath.

[@Stefy44]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

This was the case in Jesus's time.

[@isaactamplin8905]

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.

[@Lovecrazedgurl]

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?

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

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

[@philipbuckley759]

this speaker convinced me to change some really big plans, in my life.....and I am depending on his teaching to have saved my very soul....

[@sweetangelstronger]

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

[@alsontaylor6080]

It is very simple. If you divorce or are divorced from a true and first marriage, remain single or reconcile.

[@noornass1988]

Amazing teaching... hammers on the nail. Bravo

[@Iamzarr]

Finally someone who speaks TRUTH! Thank You!

[@cristianobeloved]

Sorry, but what are the verses in Jeremiah that say God will write a bill of divorce, and then He calls Israel "my spouse" again??

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

Jeremiah Chapt 3...vs 6 onwards and around Chapt 31 vs 31

[@frances9659]

Wow The truth is refreshing

[@faithcooke4231]

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?

[@blessedbyyah2939]

He didnt repent because repentance means to turn away from

[@alsontaylor6080]

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.

[@cloventonguesoffire3043]

@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.

[@timothythompson4036]

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.

[@wildolive53]

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? 🥹🙏🏻

[@peaceplis]

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

[@philarevolutionarywarriorp8295]

It's rebellion against God. Romans 1 explains it perfectly. They justify feelings and emotions with twisting scripture. Sad really

[@missinsanelogic]

You obviously haven't seen the countless testimonies on KZbin of ppl ending their second marriages

[@missinsanelogic]

@@beckyr1668 amen

[@christolliday3054]

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

[@missinsanelogic]

You once wed always wed people have doctrine of demons

[@ruthirwin8222]

You are right i see the damage in my children .....

[@missasinenomine]

Thank you for being so honest! I'm the same. I don't even see mine at all. Permanently damaged.

[@paulvaughan3120]

Instead of public criticism of your children you should be supporting them. How on earth can you dismiss your kids?

[@missasinenomine]

@@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.

[@paulvaughan3120]

@@missasinenomine I'm referring to Ruth

[@jimtaylor7151]

@@paulvaughan3120 I think she means her actions damaged her children, if she is criticizing anyone it's her and/or her ex husband.

[@dorcasschekina9241]

So if we are not under Moses laws this meaning we are not under the 10 commandments which God gave to Moses? That meaning we can commit sin and it’s okay?

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

HI not quite - The Mosaic law was replaced/fulfilled by Jesus who gave us a new commandment - That you love one another as I (Jesus) have loved you - by this shall all men know that you are my disciples - by the love that you have of one other ......The New Commandment encompasses the 10 Commandments

[@dorcasschekina9241]

@@DavidPawsonMinistry I appreciated your reply thanks

[@GritLifeStyle]

What if I married someone that was previously divorced? And now she wants to divorce me? Am I free to remarry?

[@philipbuckley759]

yes your first relationship was adultery.....so yes you are free, to remarry....

[@figtreetim]

Great! Finally the plain truth! 🎸Blessings🎶

[@mq3177]

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..🤔

[@maddavisdog07]

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.

[@christopherjordan6237]

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.

[@rockiie2172]

😩

[@philarevolutionarywarriorp8295]

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.

[@philipbuckley759]

@@maddavisdog07 this is the foundation of this topic....our emotions....

[@MeghanMPsalm18]

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.

[@babycakesweetiepie77]

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.

[@cuddlestsheep5863]

Excellent teaching here.

[@missasinenomine]

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.

[@juliuspaul9394]

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😅

[@lancegoodall5911]

David means they gave way to this in the 1600s with Erasmus

[@richardfrend1916]

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.

[@Rmiller488]

Explain 1 Corinthians 7:10?

[@philipbuckley759]

Mike Winger has a teaching, on this...

[@philipbuckley759]

@@Rmiller488 it is straight forward...

[@punishednomorefreetoprotec2165]

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

[@axyja6218]

Sorry…am I hearing it right for the 3rd principal is repentance which is if you are remarried, leave the marriage to stop the sin? The “leave” means divorce again?? I’m quite clear abt the no remarriage part but if two person went into a remarriage without knowing is an adultery marriage also have to divorce each other? Is this God’s heart for his people? John Piper has a very strict biblical view on remarriage, just like David Pawson, but he don’t believe divorcing again. Is really confusing

[@ajlouviere202]

The main point of Jesus's teaching is that marriage after divorce is adultery, and adulterers who fail to repent shall not inherit the kingdom of God according to Galatians 5:19-21.

[@babycakesweetiepie77]

S

[@babycakesweetiepie77]

​so if a person marries a divorcedperson and did not know it was a sin and they married had children should now divorce @@ajlouviere202

[@jaredmyers2171]

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.

[@jameslighthouse5673]

ROMANS 7 Verse 2

[@MsAnna47]

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.

[@60sfanatic]

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.

[@MsAnna47]

@@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.

[@MsAnna47]

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.

[@maleinamaleina7169]

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".....???

[@MsAnna47]

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!

[@johnborland7865]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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]

AJ Louviere yes he absolutely allowed it. Everyone was allowed to throw the second or third etc. stone. So yes he did.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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?

[@rafaelrestrepo]

Wonderful teaching.

[@oxicatblack4626]

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 🤔

[@philipbuckley759]

the intimidation is that only the ones, not caught up, in this, push this teaching...

[@bonniesweeney808]

A divorced person that marries a person that has never been married is committing fornication and that married person is committing adultery.

[@christolliday3054]

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

[@ajlouviere202]

@@christolliday3054 what about the command to forgive? What happens to those who do not forgive others?

[@christolliday3054]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@jesuschristislord7669]

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

[@denisejackson776]

A homosexual marriage was never a marriage to begin with.

[@pegc9889]

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.

[@karolinae499]

Is that right that Romans didn’t accept a capital punishment as brother David said? Wasn’t crucifixion an „authorised killing for a crime”? Can Someone explain me the distinction Please. Thank you. Praise the Lord for His faithful people.

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

I’m not certain which part of this talk David makes this statement but generally speaking capital punishment did not apply to a Roman Citizens. Protecting the status and position of the Roman Citizens was considered to be a paramount concern and to be stripped of that status was one of the worst punishments imaginable, So public executions were generally events put on to execute slaves who had run away, prisoners of war, common criminals and army deserters, and became a form or entertainment. The early Christians were also often publicly executed because of their refusal to worship or make sacrifices to the Roman gods or the Emperor.

[@karolinae499]

Thank you for your time and explanation. I’m still not sure if I understand it right. The part in which Brother David speaks of it is in minute 56:56, taking about women caught in the act of adultery.

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

@@karolinae499 Hi having listend to 56:56 then this requires a slightly different answer. Its not whether or not the Romans agreed with capital punishment, this was a test to trap Jesus. 1. Under the law of Moses this woman, if guilty of the act of Adultery, should be stoned to death. 2. If, Jesus did not allow her to be stoned, He would be guilty of breaking the law of Moses, which states that if found guilty, the punishment was death by stoning 3. But the Romans do not accept the law of Moses, and as such a stoning is murdering someone premeditated, and in public. So if Jesus stoned her under the law of Moses or allowed her to be stoned he could potentially be charged under Roman law for aiding and abetting a murder.....Jesus was without sin, so if he gave a yes or no answer he was breaking the law, either the Roman law or the Law of Moses - no win situation however................... they underestimated him when he answered - ''let him who is without sin cast the first stone''............ which can be read in a number of different ways:- A. Everyone there was guilt of the same sin - Adultery?........ and realised they were as as guilty as this woman, so not only could they not cause her they also were guilt of the crime and should be stoned themselves OR B. They became very afraid, when they realised, that he had outsmarted them and had caught them out, he knew this was a trap but also he knew what they were themselves guilty of and they suddenly became very fearful of Him . Whichever is the case we are not told but we do know how it ends......... Jesus does not condone the act, but he asks a question where are those who accuse you? ...because there was no one there to accuse her he then allows her to go. He does not forgive the act, but says, with a warning ..... go ....and don't do it again! Does this help?

[@karolinae499]

Thank you again for your time and this exhausting answer. This is what I understood from what brother David explained, however my mind is confused on: if Romans didn’t accept a capital punishment why they allowed Lord Jesus to be crucified for “His crime” (of course Lord Jesus didn’t commit any crime). Was it only because the Jews kept pushing (was it allowed in eyes of Romans law to make an exception?) I’m sorry if I make it more complicated or my question is not clear.

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

Karolina E Hi this is important so please let me assist further Romans ‘did ‘ accept Capital Punishment ........but only for lesser people eg slaves, criminals. Jews .....where they did.not normally accept capital punishment was for other Romans ( with some specific exceptions ) The worst punishment for a Roman who did wrong was was considered. worse than death - to be stripped of his citizenship , this humiliation was considered worse than death and the ultimate punishment for a Roman The law of Moses instructed Jews to stone those caught in the act of adultery But the Romans did not accept the law of Moses ..... so if a Jew killed another Jew citing the law of Moses that was considered by Rome as murder ....... a crime the Romans would punish by Capital Punishment - The Romans would not treat a fellow Roman in the same way A Roman who killed another Roman of the same standing would not normally be subjected to the death sentence ..... one rule for us and one rule for the Jews David point is that had Jesus said “stone her “..... under Roman law he was aiding and abetting a murder and would possibly have been arrested as breaking Roman laws ..... under Jewish law the Jews expected him to say stone her or he would be breaking the law of Moses .... he could not win ...... yet he did outsmart them with the Truth ....... when Jesus was eventually arrested by the Romans - they could find no fault in him and wanted to let him go...... he never committed any crime under Roman law ...... neither did he ever break the law of Moses though they did try desperately to catch him out on many occasions

[@Ganruut123]

so if i marry another believer and she is divorced from a husband who is a believer and he is alive. Does this mean everytime I have sex with her in marriage, that I am sinning?

[@shealovesjesuschrist]

Yes. She is one flesh, “till death do us part” with her first husband in the eyes of God. The relationship is adultery and adulterous people donor make it into the kingdom.

[@grant2149]

​@@shealovesjesuschristAmen

[@joshuamortey]

David pawson, is really a teacher of the Bible. May be the Lord bless you, may HE keep you strong healthy

[@fredarroyo7429]

Someone who agrees with you not Jesus is really a teacher of the bible?

[@christolliday3054]

He is really wrong on this one

[@philipbuckley759]

@@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.

[@philipbuckley759]

@@christolliday3054 and your reason, or reasons.....

[@christolliday3054]

@@philipbuckley759 no idea what you on about please be more specific

[@Zndwls]

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.

[@phillipspruill4590]

I've come to believe that a couple espoused to each other in Jewish culture named them married. I see that David touchs on that too. Where am confused at is the use of the word fornication (unmarried people) where culture acknowledges the marriage and the Heavenly host acknowledges the betrothal as husband and wife as well as seen in the the angel's communication with Joeseph concerning Mary. Scripture testimony calls the betrothal period marriage. How can fornication (unmarried people) take its place when its clear they are married? Thank you in advance to anyone who will respond.

[@philipbuckley759]

they were not married, yet committed to be married, that is the difference....

[@jesusislord3604]

JesusIsLord 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

[@ajlouviere202]

Did Adam have more than one wife? What about Noah, Shem, Ham, or Japeth?

[@elizabethmcewen6230]

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.

[@laurapiovan]

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.

[@laurapiovan]

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.

[@elizabethmcewen6230]

universalblob - Very well, put. I agree. :)

[@elizabethmcewen6230]

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?

[@laurapiovan]

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).

[@christopherjordan6237]

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.

[@punishednomorefreetoprotec2165]

❤❤❤ 100%

[@babycakesweetiepie77]

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?

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

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

[@GoWithJesus]

What Verses in the New Testament outlaw polygyny?

[@johnborland7865]

Go With Jesus !!!! That’s my question.

[@boltingpuppies]

I don't see verses outlawing polygamy since Yeshua said not one jot or tittle of the law would be abolished before Heaven and Earth disappear...and there are laws about men being allowed more than one spouse. The husband cannot diminish the food, clothing or marital rights of the first wife. They also cannot marry two sisters while they are both alive (as this would cause the sisters to be rivals). Multiple wives are not God's ideal for marriage since in the beginning He gave Adam one wife and said it was very good. Later when he re-established man on earth through Noah we see that each of the men on the ark only had one wife, God's ideal. *What's allowable and what is ideal can be very different.* In the new testament a pastor can only be the husband of one wife...this is the ideal picture of Christ and His bride. So a man *could* have two wives but he *may not* divorce his wife *in order to* marry another woman. It will be more expensive and tiresome. King David had many wives but was not in adultery until he took another man's wife. *Having said this,* if a man takes a vow at his first marriage that sounds something like 'forsaking all others till death do us part' with the intention of only being married to one wife at the time of his first marriage then that would seem to exclude him from having more than one wife *due to the vow he made before God.* I would think polygamists do not put that line into their marriage vows.

[@jordan7985]

Go With Jesus !!!! It was not part of God’s original plan for marriage, that’s all I know. But it’s an interesting point that needs to be addressed in the discussion of divorce and remarriage, not passed over

[@ajlouviere202]

Romans 7:2-3, 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, 1 Corinthians 7:39

[@jesusislord3604]

Those say women are bound

[@kevinsmith3274]

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?

[@youngsamuel1]

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

[@franciscavaldez7636]

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

[@Kami0879]

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!

[@tivmego]

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.

[@rejoicingintruth2517]

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.

[@philipstel]

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.

[@ronpolson6981]

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.

[@messiahswordsfirst6992]

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.

[@ronpolson6981]

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?

[@ronpolson6981]

@@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).

[@messiahswordsfirst6992]

@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!

[@Iamzarr]

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!

[@crwnofenlightenment]

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.

[@60sfanatic]

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]

Hopefully your issues with this teaching does not lead you to reject the words and commands of Christ.

[@60sfanatic]

@@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?

[@fatimas2067]

So in a few words, my husband is comitiing adulture, can I ask for divorce?

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@billyhw5492]

So the Catholic Church was right all along?

[@ajlouviere202]

About marriage but not all along. They joined the reformers by offering annulments starting in 1626.

[@vilialex300]

Sorry but catholic are not Christians! Just pretend.. it’s sin to be name it church ! Cut it out!

[@rockiie2172]

Just on marriage 🤔

[@philipbuckley759]

@@ajlouviere202 the reformers were not reforming anything, eh....

[@ajlouviere202]

@@philipbuckley759 they tried and failed to repair what the Romans and Greeks did. All of them depart from the original teachings.

[@Stefy44]

I wish Mr Pawson's books could be available in French .. :)

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

Stephanie - French is the one language we have struggled to get good trustworthy translators but we do have some translations available in French and we are currently working with two great guys to translate more - if you write to us we can provide you with a list of what has already been translated [e-mail]

[@Stefy44]

@@DavidPawsonMinistry oh great! thank you !

[@azeeuwnl1961]

Very detailed and thorough. Could do with a summary…

[@SKP2321]

Most of his sermons could. I’ve reconciled by listening to them over and over lol

[@philipbuckley759]

there is really no exception, and this is a salvation issue...

[@boltingpuppies]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

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.

[@boltingpuppies]

@@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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@boltingpuppies]

@@ajlouviere202 Totally agree. She is unmarried but still belongs to her husband (the covenant is until death).

[@fussygirl65]

Dang darn if you do and darn if you don’t

[@philipbuckley759]

it bees that way...sometimes....

[@clairebearie87]

Yep singleness seeks marriage; marriage seeks singleness

[@ajlouviere202]

@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.

[@BrunoFernandes-nu1ky]

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!

[@darthjedi99]

Are you divorced? Remarried? Just wondering why you just don't read the text for what it says? Mark 10:11, Luke 16:18, Romans 7:2,3....pretty clear.

[@grant2149]

​@@darthjedi99excatly.

[@gkwn7436]

This is my 1st hearing of this wonderful bible teaching My name is gay wilson and plz pray for my family whom I am estranged from

[@philipbuckley759]

amen...

[@steveareeno65]

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

[@54725472777]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

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.

[@shellic5374]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@RealEstateRadioTV-SA]

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.

[@Kami0879]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

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.

[@fredarroyo7429]

@@gecko499 ezra God commanded people to be divorced, are they not blessed for keeping Hid commands?

[@fredarroyo7429]

@@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 ?

[@fredarroyo7429]

@@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

[@fredarroyo7429]

@@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.

[@wongmichael9659]

What David quoted in Jeremiah Chapter 8 has in fact no mention of God wrote a bill of divorce for Israel; or verses to that effect!

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

This is Steve on behalf of David - David does say not to believe what he says but to check the scriptures for yourself ...........the reference in Jeremiah is in fact Jeremiah 3:8

[@wongmichael9659]

@@DavidPawsonMinistry Steve, thanks for the prompt reply, and the right reference in Jer 3:8. This is a very sensitive topic, therefore the Berean attitude is required to ensure we are in step with God's intention.

[@philipbuckley759]

God is divorced, but not seeking another......waiting to reconcile...

[@nicholasdibari9095]

“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!

[@ajlouviere202]

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.

[@JamesWFisher22]

@@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.

[@SWA2371]

No sin is greater than the other, ask for forgiveness!

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

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

[@alsontaylor6080]

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.

[@alsontaylor6080]

"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]

No Unrepentant sin is forgiven

[@alsontaylor6080]

@@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.

[@ajlouviere202]

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.

[@jankorec8345]

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

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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]

AJ Louviere ...Amen...greetings from Slovenia-Europe

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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?

[@jankorec8345]

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

[@bonniebundle6692]

I love his teaching but on this subject my question is…. What about us Christian ladies who marry Christian men who later decide they reject Jesus and go atheist, abuse their wife and children? How should a woman handle this when church leaders side with husband telling wife her behaviours appalling for going away to protect self and children?

[@acolley2891]

To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife. To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 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. 1 Corinthians 7:10‭-‬15

[@christolliday3054]

dos this mean even though my first wife who isn't a Christian and committed adultery I had no right to divorce? she has been with her current partner for many years now I have remarried to a christian lady who has never before been married am I expected to divorce my current wife of 5 years and go back to my first wife who is in a long term relationship and wouldn't come back anyway .. so we are both adultery and we have what lost our salvation or inheritance ..sorry but I am so confused by this

[@jesusislord3604]

These people create a false gospel doctrine by ignoring words. All the marriage passages are pronoun based showing that it was all being answered in context of the law

[@repentobeyjesus9187]

Simply believe what The Lord Jesus Christ says plainly, in His word. If you divorced your wife, and she is still alive, then she is still your wife until she dies or you die. It really is not confusing. You do not want to obey Jesus. That is what your problem is. You must do what is righteous, no matter how hard it may be. If your wife does not want to reconcile, you must live as a single man, and serve Jesus with all your heart, still praying for your wife to see the truth, and reconcile with you, and also for her to become a born again Christian, and to believe and trust in Jesus as her Savior and Lord.. God bless and keep you , dear friend.

[@christolliday3054]

@@repentobeyjesus9187 you say I dont want to give up my current christian wife thats true i dont agree at all with your theology you missed a lot in it

[@blessedbyyah2939]

@@jesusislord3604 she is right hit the nail on the head many are lost in lust of the flesh you will not enter heaven not my words but the Lords..flee adultery and thats not a covenant in Gods eyes shalom

[@philipbuckley759]

@@christolliday3054 then study up, on it, and makes your actions....accordantly..

[@KristiMusicVideos]

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.

[@DoctorJames]

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.

[@user-rq7cg1xj5e]

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.

[@randynethery1878]

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.

[@robydany8749]

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.

[@user-rq7cg1xj5e]

@@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!

[@tommatthews9341]

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!

[@yaradaveiga4324]

One question though so my husband was married before me but, the wife cheated which led to a divorce and years later we met and got married so am I commuting adultery ???to my understanding yes .so do I leave him ?Nd if yes won't I still be commuting adultery if i remarry since he's my first husband??

[@philipbuckley759]

if your husband were married, before, your relationship is adultery, so yes you could marry, because you have never been in a covenant relationship...

[@Tracey..H]

If his wife cheated on him that’s grounds for divorce biblically. If you are both believers stay married! Your not in sin. Read all of 1 Corinthians 7

[@yaradaveiga4324]

@@Tracey..H thank you and will do.

[@sacredclown4179]

Can someone clear this up for me: My situation is as follows I was asshole in my marriage, when I got married I was a committed Christian, I then fell away I become extremely abusive to my wife( who was wonderful and has since remarried) I committed adultery once and told her straight away. I wanted to stay married and would have repented, the church offered no support and I was divorced on biblical grounds and fair enough too!!! Eight years later I have realised the world is a toilet I genuinely want to repent, but I have to face this issue of remarriage. Everyone I speak has a different take!!! I believe the bond has been broken, nowhere literally in the bible does it say I cannot be re married, if someone can provide scriptural evidence to the contrary I'm all ears? How can a bond be broken for one and not the other? Would that not be a house divvied against itself?? Either the bond is broken for both or it is not? Please I am open to genuine erudition on the matter , not just subjective biases.

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

Write to us and we will try to help you [e-mail]

[@repentforthekingdomofgodis6848]

@sacred clown, in the eyes of God she is YOUR WIFE. Ask the Lord that she repents, but more importantly pray for her salvation. Scripture makes it very clear that ADULTERERS WILL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

[@FiveCHMP]

She is your wife and you either reconcile or you stay alone. The bond isnt broken for her. She is living in adultery and needs to repent and come back to you or stay alone. Neither of you can remarry.

[@pegc9889]

When Jesus talked to the woman at the well, He described her as having had HUSBANDS. He did NOT say she had boyfriends/adulterers. Therefore, He recognized her marriages. When people are divorced and remarried, God recognizes it. They confess the sin and He FORGIVES. He has sent new spouses into the lives of many divorced Christians, if there was PERPETUAL adultery, He would not have done that.

[@philipbuckley759]

@@pegc9889 appeal to ignorance, or silence....no information has been given so no conclusion can be reached...

[@SometimeAgo65]

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...

[@philipbuckley759]

evidently it is not necessary, to be a virgin, only if one say that they are, the better be one, that seems to be....it....

[@ajlouviere202]

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.

[@isaactamplin8905]

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????

[@SometimeAgo65]

@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 😊❤️

[@mickjames7962]

What do you do if your ex partner is with someone else? Or if you came to the Lord after several marriages and relationships, and are single, but would like to marry for life now and do it's God's way, but you can't go back to any of your former partners? Do you just live the rest of your life either alone or in sin? ? Surely God can make a way for people like that.

[@DavidPawsonaufDeutschOffiziell]

Hi Mick David teaches what the Bible says about Divorce and Remarriage and there are verses about not going back - seek the Lord and ask for wisdom for your own personal circumstances but do accept and act according to how HE answers you

[@mickjames7962]

@@DavidPawsonaufDeutschOffiziell I suppose my simple question is could this person find someone and remarry if they have both come to Christ, it's not possible to reconcile any previous relationship, can he forgive them and cleanse them of that sin and error. Or is it the Lord's will they remain celebrate and alone? I can't think that it is. Also. No one ever talks about David's many wives AND concubines, or Solomon's 900 wives and concubines, and I mean they were seen as doing what is right in the sight of the Lord. As well, if we are to do by Garden of Eden original design standards, which I agree with, then we should all also be vegetarian, for example. I don't say that to mock the Lord, but I mean are those who judge others on adultery not also hypocrites, not seeing the log in their own eyes as for example that is also something that God intends to restore in the kingdom to come.

[@DavidPawsonaufDeutschOffiziell]

@@mickjames7962 Mick we cannot use David nor Solomon as good examples or we can all take multiple wives, all at the same time today against the words of Jesus in Matthew 19:3-20 which is very clear. There are those who will judge you and those who will encourage you by saying its fine go ahead - It does not matter what advice you are even by others - what matters is how God feels about your situation and you need to have that out with Him - his position is the only one that counts, May I suggest you re-read the scriptures - repent if you feel you have wronged, ask for forgiveness and then ask the Lord for direction .....wait on Him patiently until He gives you direction..........your standing with Him is more important that what others say I pray the Lord will give you very clear direction - this is a personal matter between you and Him

[@mickjames7962]

@@DavidPawsonaufDeutschOffiziell thank you what you say is true and the course I am already taking. However additionally I'm trying to understand better so that I can be a better example and understand the scriptures properly in evangelizing. So for example I agree with you about David and Solomon, yet nevertheless the Lord was pleased at least with David until the end. Yet also I don't deny that Jesus clarified it all. Anyway thanks for your good advice.

[@philipbuckley759]

@@DavidPawsonaufDeutschOffiziell the Bible makes no allowance for this, and as such, I understand the emotional aspect, but what would a same sex couple do

[@rightreasons7908]

If someone could help me please? Clearly this has been a problem since Moses day and when Jesus death burial resurrection brought us into the New Testament one would have to believe this topic effected many many families. Now after Jesus Ascension the Apotles went and preached the gospel and as scriptures says turned the world upside down. Can anyone I mean anyone give me an example of someone divorcing to show repentance? I mean almost the entire city of Samaria was converted and out of all those people, wheres the topic? Where’s the ones the Apostles said you must divorce him or her to be saved. Just one example please. Or , I must end my marriage to follow Jesus.

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

Hi there are two topics here : - divorce and remarriage The key point David makes concerns the question of whether marriage is a contract which can be broken ......or a covenant which only ends with death This is not about “what does the Bible say about divorce and salvation” ..... it’s more about Jesus teaching on “remarriage after divorce “. The Bible lists grounds for divorce ...... I cannot find any verses that Jesus says that support remarriage after divorce except - by the death of a partner

[@aprilriley8424]

Ezra 10

[@babycakesweetiepie77]

My husband was married twice before we married .both his wives divorced him they were all unsaved. He did not want either divorce. Many years later both my husband and i became Christians and married .his first wife died but his second wife that divorced him against his will is still alive. Should we still stay married? Its been 15 years we are both Christians. We dont want a divorce but we both want to go to heaven .

[@DavidPawsonMinistry]

When David was a Pastor he would rarely give advice regarding personal circumstances but what I would say is that this is matter between you and God and I encourage you to seek the Lord for wisdom. Divorce and Remarriage whilst against Gods direction for righteous living is not the "unforgivable sin" - "Seek the LORD while he may be found; call on him while he is near."

[@babycakesweetiepie77]

@@DavidPawsonMinistry i sought wisdom before marrying him. Our pastor at the time was thrilled witj us getting marrief .Now we have been married 15 years .both elderly and he is disabled and very much depends on me as his wife to take care of him ,take him to doctors, feed him ,wash his clothes and on and on. According to this teaching we are in sin because his xwife is still alive and we will not be saved if we are living in adultery. This is the first i ever heard this teaching .if i leave him so we can be saved it will be very devastating for us both.I myself always believed we were in Gods grace and that we are saved by grace . Now this teaching seems to be opposite. Neither of us want to go to hell. So i guess we should dissolve our marriage and go separate ways and trust God to somehow take care of my poor disabled husband . He will be so sad and crushed when i let him know about this. It will be very especially difficult for my husband .we are poor . Living separately is going to be devastating. I should probably go live in a shelter to avoid going to hell.

[@Lakeslover1]

@@babycakesweetiepie77 Please don’t leave your husband. How could God ever be happy with that ? Stay with him, look after him, and both as Christians, go to Heaven.

[@babycakesweetiepie77]

@@Lakeslover1 agreed .

[@treece1]

Let me get this straight. My wife divorced me. And 3 years later. I met someone. We ain't married What do we do. .

[@mikeroybal7923]

Dont get remarried. I am divorced and stayed single. It is hard but Gods word is true

[@ajlouviere202]

@@mikeroybal7923 also, to be in any relationship of this nature while a covenant spouse lives is adultery.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@dlalena any relationship of this nature would be adultery, since even to lust (in any way) is adultery according to Jesus.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@dlalena keep in mind Jesus's teaching in Matthew 5:27-30, when it comes to separating from those things that cause you to sin.

[@Shona68360]

Remain single or reconcile back to your wife... if she dies then you're free to remarry a widow or someone who never had a biblical marriage

[@christopherjordan6237]

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

[@felixguerrero6062]

Mike Winger thoroughly refuted on this issue, Pawson is in a league of his own.

[@rightreasons7908]

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.

[@felixguerrero6062]

@@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

[@ajlouviere202]

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.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@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.

[@philipbuckley759]

sadly it seems that M Winger is another false teacher, but look at the denomination that he is in....

[@bruceallensmith4491]

I know I'm a little late to this party, but some input would be appreciated: I know his interpretation is "remarriage is adultery", however when Jesus was discussing the requirements of Deacons/Elders, he said "be the husband of one wife", doesn't this assume that there will be men in the church who have divorced? Also, my second point: Didnt Jesus say he came to fulfill the "old law" and not to do away with it? Then he was criticizing the "old law", which appears as long as the wife had a "writing of divorcement" it was accepted that they could remarry.

[@seyiekundayo871]

Bruce Allen Smith to answer your first point, for a man to be a deacon he has to be a husband of one wife, which is a standard for leadership position and that is what the people of the church should emulate. And the second one Jesus stated that God gave Moses that Law because of the hardness of their heart, Christ said God Hates divorce. Now we have the holyspirit and in a better covenant. We have the power to overcome temptation and that’s why the commandments is for us Christians today

[@bruceallensmith4491]

@@seyiekundayo871 thanks for reply, but you really didn't answer the first question: If the qualifications of an elder or deacon are "husband of one wife", then doesn't that indicate that there are men in the church who have been married before?

[@seyiekundayo871]

Bruce Allen Smith like I said, it’s a standard, and most importantly the reason why this is been brought up was because there are certainly people who are committing adultery also people who has more than one wife, infact in the church of Corinth there is a guy who married his fathers wife. So definitely there would be people who are doing the wrong thing but that doesn’t make it right. I hope this clarify it

[@alsontaylor6080]

Jesus clearly changed the law back to the original intent. Otherwise, he would have told the Pharisees that, yes, they could divorce their wives for any reason, or he would have told them that they could divorce for a matter of uncleanness. He told them that he who puts his wife away and marries another commits adultery. That is the rule to follow, rather than hoping some analysis of Jesus saying that he came to fulfill the law will somehow negate what he told the Pharisees. The two statements seem conflictory, but we are clearly called to keep our vows of "For better or worse, until death do us part." So keep those vows, and if you are divorced, remain single or reconcile as Paul stated, speaking for God, in 1 Corinthians 7.

[@ajlouviere202]

@@bruceallensmith4491 because Jesus said it was not so in the beginning. What does this mean for us? We are not Jews. The precept, in Deuteronomy 24:1-4, was given to the Jews of the exodus before they entered the promised land. Women were being sent away unjustly and stoned to death according to the law after they were caught in adultery. Moses gave the precept to the Jews, not God, in order to stop the killing. Moses did not sanction divorce and remarriage, he only managed it for the time during the exodus or all of the women would have been killed off during that period. Jesus came to make a New Covenant with all people, and fulfilled all 613 ordinances of the law of Moses on the cross (Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:15-25, Galatians 4:21-31, Galatians 5:1-15).