Limitation in remarriage following divorce Deu.24:4

[OzExpat]

In Deuteronomy 24:4 there is a limitation to remarriage to the original husband following the divorce from the second husband as this would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. There is no explanation that I am aware of that explains why such a union would be detestable. I am just wondering, considering that marriage should refect the unbreakable covenant bond between Christ and His bride, the church, if Hebrews 6:4-6 sheds any light on this.

 

[Carl Emerson]

In Deuteronomy 24:4 there is a limitation to remarriage to the original husband following the divorce from the second husband as this would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. There is no explanation that I am aware of that explains why such a union would be detestable. I am just wondering, considering that marriage should refect the unbreakable covenant bond between Christ and His bride, the church, if Hebrews 6:4-6 sheds any light on this.

The issue in my opinion comes down to integrity.

The dissolution of the first marriage should be honoured.

Marriage should not be considered lightly.

Matt 24 comes to mind...

38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark...

Casual marriages are a sign of the times - we see this in the celebrity world daily.

 

[HTacianas]

In Deuteronomy 24:4 there is a limitation to remarriage to the original husband following the divorce from the second husband as this would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. There is no explanation that I am aware of that explains why such a union would be detestable. I am just wondering, considering that marriage should refect the unbreakable covenant bond between Christ and His bride, the church, if Hebrews 6:4-6 sheds any light on this.

Hebrews 6:4-6 is a warning against apostasy. If I understand your question, there may be some similarities between the two but it isn't very clear.

Jeremiah 3 uses divorce and remarriage as an analogy of God's covenant with Israel. I don't know if that might help you with your question.

 

[Tolworth John]

I am just wondering, considering that marriage should refect the unbreakable covenant bond between Christ and His bride,

We live in a non christian world that is actively hostile to Christian morality.

The Christian should keep his/her marriage vows, but as Paul wrote about in Romans about marriage where one partner is Christian and the other isn't, there is no automatic divorce of the unbeliever.

We need to be sensitive in how we counsel new believers, young people, those contemplating marriage.
Many have minds corrupted by todays standards.

So for Christians yes there marriage should reflect that unbreakable bond, but when as saved sinners we fail and there is devorce we should still love and care for those involved.

 

[pdudgeon]

Very well explained!!!

 

[Bruno Fernandes]

Em Deuteronômio 24:4 há uma limitação ao novo casamento com o marido original após o divórcio do segundo marido, pois isso seria detestável aos olhos do Senhor. Não há nenhuma explicação que eu conheça que explique por que tal união seria detestável. Estou apenas imaginando, considerando que o casamento deve refletir o vínculo inquebrável da aliança entre Cristo e Sua noiva, a igreja, se Hebreus 6:4-6 lança alguma luz sobre isso.

I suggest you this text:

A Rebuttal to Todd Scacewater's "Divorce and Remarriage in Deuteronomy 24:1-4"

 

[Bruno Fernandes]

(translated by Google)

Good afternoon, brothers!

I will give a brief account of my situation, to facilitate the understanding of my questions.

I married shortly after conversion, to a woman I was dating, who claimed to be a Christian. After much turmoil in her marriage (including several beatings on her part and threats to call the police), she returned to her mother's house, filed for divorce, started dating months later (before the divorce decision), sent her me pictures with the guy and verbally humiliated me in a totally unnecessary way several times in this time.

Years later, she contacted me saying she missed me and wanted to date. After I asked her about the weather, she said she didn't regret anything, but wanted to date. In addition, he confirmed with other questions that he is not a true believer, as he has zero fear of God. How can I remarry with her if she is clearly not a true believer?

That said, I spent a lot of time studying divorce and remarriage. I will summarize what I saw and I await some contribution from the brothers, if possible. If you can answer me on just one of the points, I kindly ask you to be the first, if possible.

1) I have not found a text that says that a man abandoned (passive) by his wife commits adultery if he marries another woman;

2) if a woman who was abandoned, even for an unjust cause (Deut. 24), could marry again, except to priests (Lev. 21), after the coming of the Lord the abandoned woman could no longer marry? It's not my case, but it doesn't seem to make much sense. Was there more grace for the abandoned woman before? This leads me to suspicions regarding translations.

3) Why does the text about "divorce" (or put away) appear in Lucas 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 demonstrates that this does not occur (Abraham and Hagar, marriage with foreigners, relationships between relatives, I Cor. 5, I Cor. 6, Deut. 24...)

5) The verbs allow and command are interchanged in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. Why do almost everyone who preaches Matthew 19 ignore this interchange in Mark 10?

6) Why do people ignore that the procedural issue 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 by asking where the certificate of divorce would be?

7) Why is it difficult to see that there is no full similarity in the treatment between the sexes in the biblical text? Not in Deut. 24, nor in all the speeches of the Lord Jesus, nor in I Corinthians 7.

Thank you immensely for your attention. God bless you!

 

[ZephBonkerer]

(translated by Google)

Good afternoon, brothers!

I will give a brief account of my situation, to facilitate the understanding of my questions.

I married shortly after conversion, to a woman I was dating, who claimed to be a Christian. After much turmoil in her marriage (including several beatings on her part and threats to call the police), she returned to her mother's house, filed for divorce, started dating months later (before the divorce decision), sent her me pictures with the guy and verbally humiliated me in a totally unnecessary way several times in this time.

Years later, she contacted me saying she missed me and wanted to date. After I asked her about the weather, she said she didn't regret anything, but wanted to date. In addition, he confirmed with other questions that he is not a true believer, as he has zero fear of God. How can I remarry with her if she is clearly not a true believer?

I can help answer some of your questions. First off, if you are considering dating your former wife, I strongly advise against it. Not just for biblical reasons, but based on her history.

1) I have not found a text that says that a man abandoned (passive) by his wife commits adultery if he marries another woman;

2) if a woman who was abandoned, even for an unjust cause (Deut. 24), could marry again, except to priests (Lev. 21), after the coming of the Lord the abandoned woman could no longer marry? It's not my case, but it doesn't seem to make much sense. Was there more grace for the abandoned woman before? This leads me to suspicions regarding translations.

Merely getting married again is not adultery. Deut 24:2 proves just that. Unless adultery was lawful under the Mosaic Law (it was not) or unless Jesus changed the Law to expand the definition of adultery (He did not - He made that very clear at Matt 5:17-18), any and all remarriage after divorce cannot be adultery.

In those days, it was considered socially acceptable to dump your spouse for any reason or no reason at all. Some men would do so just to run off with some Instagram model. That was treacherous and disgusting behavior that Jesus rightly condemned as tantamount to adultery. There is no comparing that to getting a divorce for some far more serious reason and later remarrying. Quite frankly, I don't know what makes some people think Jesus condemned any and all remarriage after divorce, no matter how compelling the grounds were.

3) Why does the text about "divorce" (or put away) appear in Lucas in the middle of texts about money?

In those days, being wealthy was seen as a sign of favor from God, and the Pharisees loved money. The general theme of Luke 16 was to rebut this notion.

4) Why is it believed that the union of one flesh is something ontological, and there are several passages in which it demonstrates that this does not occur (Abraham and Hagar, marriage with foreigners, relationships between relatives, I Cor. 5, I Cor. 6, Deut. 24...)

They're probably taking Matthew 19:6 to the extreme. Merely having sex with someone does not create some everlasting bond with them. Don't get me wrong: I would never encourage casual sex, nor would I exploit someone in that way.

5) The verbs allow and command are interchanged in Matthew 19 and Mark 10. Why do almost everyone who preaches Matthew 19 ignore this interchange in Mark 10?

I would not have an easy answer for this, other than that the four gospels were four independent accounts of a very important event in history.

6) Why do people ignore that the procedural issue 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 by asking where the certificate of divorce would be?

That's probably ignorance of history. That divorce certificate didn't exist just to provide busy work for clerks at the public records office. That certificate protected the divorced wife from charges of adultery if she married again (and she probably would).

 

[DragonFox91]

I don't have anything to add, just felt like Conservative Christianity section was dead so like the activity & the discussion.

More people post in this section please!

 

[Great-American]

I won't argue the marriage issue here, as I am a Catholic and I think that most of you are not, and therefore we probably disagree.
But I will say this because it is a verifiable fact: It was not all that long ago that no church approved of divorces. Today, the Catholic Church remains alone in having not changed that position.

Societies change, opinions change, but God and His Word do not change.