Comments on: Divorce and Remarriage in the New Testament (Part 1) http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/divorce-and-remarriage-in-the-new-testament-part-1/ To Understand Truth and to Attain the True Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:19:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: John Carroll http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/divorce-and-remarriage-in-the-new-testament-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-31594 John Carroll Sun, 26 Sep 2010 07:00:18 +0000 http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/04/divorce-and-remarriage-in-the-new-testament-part-1/#comment-31594 Great article. I agree with your conclusion. I really enjoyed the read. Great article. I agree with your conclusion. I really enjoyed the read.

]]> By: Kam Weng http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/divorce-and-remarriage-in-the-new-testament-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-21 Kam Weng Wed, 10 May 2006 00:33:41 +0000 http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/04/divorce-and-remarriage-in-the-new-testament-part-1/#comment-21 The putting away (divorce) is a formal declaration of a reality - a broken covenant or a dead relationship. The intention of the divorce primarily is not for the purpose of giving freedom for remarriage - although that is evidently permitted - but to free the aggrieved victim from bondage to a dead and oppressive relationship. Only then can he/she begin a new start in life. Whether the adulterer/ress continues in adultery or get married is not the focus of this provision. However, without a doubt the adulterer/ress is presumed to be in a state of sin until there is repentance before God. The same judgment applies to the adulterer/ress' new marriage. How the church should deal with this is of course a pastoral issue. It should be dealt with like any other sin in church - wisely and firmly. The putting away (divorce) is a formal declaration of a reality – a broken covenant or a dead relationship. The intention of the divorce primarily is not for the purpose of giving freedom for remarriage – although that is evidently permitted – but to free the aggrieved victim from bondage to a dead and oppressive relationship. Only then can he/she begin a new start in life.

Whether the adulterer/ress continues in adultery or get married is not the focus of this provision. However, without a doubt the adulterer/ress is presumed to be in a state of sin until there is repentance before God.

The same judgment applies to the adulterer/ress’ new marriage. How the church should deal with this is of course a pastoral issue. It should be dealt with like any other sin in church – wisely and firmly.

]]> By: Vincent Chia http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/divorce-and-remarriage-in-the-new-testament-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-20 Vincent Chia Tue, 09 May 2006 03:50:59 +0000 http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/04/divorce-and-remarriage-in-the-new-testament-part-1/#comment-20 You wrote: “Our conclusion must therefore be that when a man puts away his wife for reason of sexual immorality, this putting away has the effect of dissolving the marriage bond. The result is that he is free to remarry without committing adultery since in such a case divorce dissolves the marriage and the parties are no longer man and wife.�

If this is the case – that is, the marriage bond is dissolved when a man puts away his wife for reason of sexual immorality – isn’t it true that the marriage is also dissolved for the guilty party (the adulterous wife)? As such, the guilty party does not sin when she remarries, since her previous marriage to her husband is dissolved. It cannot be true that for the “innocent party� the marriage is dissolved, while the guilty party is still “married� to her husband! The adulterous, therefore, can remarry based on this alone. Your view on divorce & remarriage will logically lead to the acceptance of remarriage for the guilty party as well. Mark my words.

]]>