What does the bible was say about Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage

**Beck** · 06-17-2011, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by Rose

One must go back to the law of Moses from which Jesus was drawing. In the Law of Moses, stated in the Bible to be given from God, the man was allowed to divorce his wife if she lost favor in his eyes, that same privilege was not given to a woman.

Deut. 24:1-2 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.

The Old Testament is the context from which we must begin to understand the nature of the "God" of the Bible, and from that context we see that "God" does indeed have a bias toward the male. This "God" of the Old Testament is the same God that Jesus calls his father which is definitely not a gender-neutral god.

Yahweh in the Old Testament is presented as a masculine, dominator god who holds a double standard when it comes to women...what is allowed for men is not allowed for women. In fact women were considered the property of the man, by the standard set forth by Yahweh. These are issues that must be dealt with in order to come to any real understanding of who the God of the Bible really is.

Rose

As I believe the Old Testament Laws were one spectrum that Jesus said that what God joined together was made one. Then no one can pull them apart because they are of one flesh. This was the case at the first according to Jesus. What Jesus and the New Testament shines light on is the Love, Marriage of male and female as becoming one flesh. The question was asked to Jesus why then the laws of Moses which allowed [suffered] a letter of divorcement? Jesus indicated that it was their hearts. Showing the lack of the Spirit of God to follow the law of marriage.

Therefore through the Spirit of God with the coming of the New Testament it creates this new heart that no longer wants to put away his wife, but to honor her and cherish her as part of is own body. So what you see as a double standard was only allowed by God becasue of the hearts of man, but in time God would give the Holy Spirit to dwell in their hearts and from this new creation love is the center. That love is to show through in how man deals with man and woman. I believe Paul in Ephesians gave an clear picture of this the relationship between Christ and the church an picture of an relationship of husband and wife. Also 1 John speaks about this new commandment, but not an new one, but an old one and that is love.

So really the Old Testament of the Laws is only a school master to the New Testament where we no longer have those laws written down on stones, but rather now have them written down on our hearts. That's much different than what Jesus told the Pharisees about their hearts that wanted to put their wife's away and take up another. So I would hope you can see the growth or progression of the heart's of man by the Spirit of the New Covenant.

**Beck** · 06-17-2011, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by RAM

That's fascinating ... I was under the impression that the Bible never said a woman could divorce her husband. I thought only men could divorce their wives. I'm gonna look into this more.

I took that everyone understood that point. The book of Mark seem to be pointed toward an audience of Gentiles or at lease Hellenistic churches. In so when we read where the woman is said to put away her husband that is was also adultery.

As for Matthew's account his books seem to follow Mark's in many ways but pointed to an audience of Jews. In so much with in this topic Matthew refers to an exception [save only] for fornication. Which the Jewish audience would readly known from Deu.22:13-21 and there after Moses given the letter of divorcement [putting away] Deu.241-4.

**throwback** · 06-17-2011, 09:30 AM

Those of us who believe the Bible to be true need to first make sure we know and understand its message and once we have done that, we need to be honest with the world about what the books teach. As it pertains to the man/woman relationship with one another, the books of the Bible both old and newer do seem to indicate that the bridegroom and husband are in a sense the owners of the bride and wife respectively. In the household, according to scripture there is a hierarchy. You have the husband/father followed by the wife/mother, then there are the children below those parties.

Nowhere that I am aware of are women given the permission to put away their husbands for any reason as apparently according to the marriage agreement though the marriage is a partnership, the husband in a real sense is the "possessor" of the wife in a way that she is not of him.

So in summation the scriptures seem to indicate that women are to be viewed as the property of their husband or fiance' in much the same light as children are considered the property of their parents. (So those who would compare the biblical value of women to livestock please hush). Husbands have authority over their wives and have the responsibility to take care of the needs of their wifes and in addition to that are called to be understanding of their wives recognizing that she is different from him.

**Rose** · 06-17-2011, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by throwback

Those of us who believe the Bible to be true need to first make sure we know and understand its message and once we have done that, we need to be honest with the world about what the books teach. As it pertains to the man/woman relationship with one another, the books of the Bible both old and newer do seem to indicate that the bridegroom and husband are in a sense the owners of the bride and wife respectively. In the household, according to scripture there is a hierarchy. You have the husband/father followed by the wife/mother, then there are the children below those parties.

Nowhere that I am aware of are women given the permission to put away their husbands for any reason as apparently according to the marriage agreement though the marriage is a partnership, the husband in a real sense is the "possessor" of the wife in a way that she is not of him.

So in summation the scriptures seem to indicate that women are to be viewed as the property of their husband or fiance' in much the same light as children are considered the property of their parents. (So those who would compare the biblical value of women to livestock please hush). Husbands have authority over their wives and have the responsibility to take care of the needs of their wifes and in addition to that are called to be understanding of their wives recognizing that she is different from him.

You are absolutely right, that is exactly what the Bible teaches! Now, maybe you can understand why I do not believe the Bible is the word of God. With such an obvious male bias, there is no way a creator who is supposedly responsible for the existence of the universe - which includes the male/female balance of all life - could be the masculine, warrior god, Yahweh portrayed in the Bible.

A book that is so full of inequality, and imbalance skewed towards the male could only come from the minds of men!

Rose

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 06-17-2011, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by throwback

Those of us who believe the Bible to be true need to first make sure we know and understand its message and once we have done that, we need to be honest with the world about what the books teach. As it pertains to the man/woman relationship with one another, the books of the Bible both old and newer do seem to indicate that the bridegroom and husband are in a sense the owners of the bride and wife respectively. In the household, according to scripture there is a hierarchy. You have the husband/father followed by the wife/mother, then there are the children below those parties.

Nowhere that I am aware of are women given the permission to put away their husbands for any reason as apparently according to the marriage agreement though the marriage is a partnership, the husband in a real sense is the "possessor" of the wife in a way that she is not of him.

So in summation the scriptures seem to indicate that women are to be viewed as the property of their husband or fiance' in much the same light as children are considered the property of their parents. (So those who would compare the biblical value of women to livestock please hush). Husbands have authority over their wives and have the responsibility to take care of the needs of their wifes and in addition to that are called to be understanding of their wives recognizing that she is different from him.

Excellent! I love honesty. I get quite disgusted when folks try to "defend" the Bible by denying what it plainly states.

But as for your request that we who see the biblical value of women as similar to that of livestock should "hush" - I cannot yet remain silent on this point. There seems to be plenty of evidence that suggests a strong overlap of the concepts of "women" and "property." Perhaps I am wrong and you will correct me. Consider the Tenth Commandment:

Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house [property], thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife [not property?], nor his manservant [property], nor his maidservant [property], nor his ox [property], nor his ass [property], nor any thing that is thy neighbour's [property].

EVERY ITEM listed in the Tenth Commandment is the "property" of the male "neighbor." This commandment doesn't even apply to women because they don't have "wives."

Likewise, consider this law which stipulates a father must be financially compensated for his "lost property" if a man rapes his daughter:

Deuteronomy 22:28 "If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 "then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.

But what about the woman who was forcibly "SEIZED" (raped)? How is it that she is sentenced to a life of servitude to her rapist? This law does not treat her like a human being at all. The fact that the woman is treated as property is confirmed by the fact that the penalty of rape depends upon who owns the woman!

Deut 22:23 A man who rapes a betrothed virgin would be killed.
Deut 22:28 A man who rapes an unbetrothed virgin would be fined fifty shekels.

The implications are perfectly clear. The penalty is based on who OWNS the woman! [Note: Some folks have argued that this was not a rape, but rather a seduction resulting in consensual sex. We discussed this in the thread called Are some laws of the Bible immoral?.]

Another case when women were classed along with cattle is seen when the 32,000 young virgins were listed along with all the other war "booty" (an unfortunate pun in this case):

Numbers 31:31 So Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses. 32 The booty remaining from the plunder, which the men of war had taken, was six hundred and seventy-five thousand sheep, 33 seventy-two thousand cattle, 34 sixty-one thousand donkeys, 35 and thirty-two thousand persons in all, of women who had not known a man intimately. 36 And the half, the portion for those who had gone out to war, was in number three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep; 37 and the LORD's tribute of the sheep was six hundred and seventy-five. 38 The cattle were thirty-six thousand, of which the LORD's tribute was seventy-two. 39 The donkeys were thirty thousand five hundred, of which the LORD's tribute was sixty-one.

So there it is - the women are listed right along with the sheep, cattle, and donkeys.

It's not for no reason that the Jewish men would pray every morning "I think thee O Lord that you have not made me a Gentile, a slave, or a woman."