Jesus Does Not Allow Divorce-An Apology

[Alaska]

How are two people who don't know the Lord being brought together by Him in marriage? That doesn't make sense to me, and it's not how it happened in the beginning. In the beginning it was God that brought the two together. Adam and Eve did not bring themselves together.

Whenever a marriage between believers falls apart it is easy to use the excuse that God didn't bring it together in the first place; otherwise it wouldn't have fallen apart. So then there is no absolute criteria of determining what God has joined together. It ends up being what the individual decides at any time after the marriage. This is not at all the implication in what Jesus said.

By your above statement it leads to the belief that any "marriage" between unbelievers cannot be what God has joined together. Alyssa brought up this point by pointing out that John reproved Herod concerning what God said was lawful.

A main reason why Christians have died at the hands of unbelievers has been because those unbelievers have become offended after having been reproved by Christians citing the unbelievers' behaviour as being unlawful after God's law.

The document in post 32 of this thread addresses the belief that Jesus' teachings on divorce/remarriage apply only to believers. It manifests that belief to be nonsensical.

[awestruckchild]

I thought about my earlier reply for a long time. Couldn't get it out of my mind and before I read your reply to me I changed my thinking a little.

I still think I was made in Adams' image and that Adam was made in Gods' image, but....

God said they would surely die in the day they ate the fruit and then they ate the fruit.

But they were still alive.......
So they died spiritually at that moment, in that day, but they BEGAN to die physically.

This is why Jesus said we must be reborn
And it fits with: What is born of the flesh is flesh
What is born of the Spirit is spirit.

And"the flesh profits nothing.

Besides, there is no way possible that I was created in His image........I am despicable.

Because we are spiritually dead is why we must be reborn.
See, I've figured it out - Quick, somebody tell Nicodemus!!

[BCF]

Hi Alyssa S.

My friend you seem to be trying to put our time with God's time frame, and this is imposable to do. What God calls seven days could be seven years for all we know. Take for instance Seth, he was one hundred and five years old when he begat his son Enos. After he had his son Enos he lived another eight hundred and seven years and begat more sons and daughters during that time frame the Bible tells us in Genesis 5:6-7. In Genesis 5:8 the scripture tells us that all the days that Seth lived before he died were nine hundred and twelve years. Now you tell me my friend. How crazy in our time frame does that sound? I mean really, I can't even start to think of what Seth might have looked like after living in this flesh for nine hundred and twelve years. He had to be falling apart. I mean really, I'm forty four and think that I am falling apart sometimes. Can you imagine being nine hundred and twelve. For all we know Seth could have been all but ninety years old in our time frame. Our time is not God's time. Another example is Adam and Eve themselves. They did not have a child that was recorded until Adam was one hundred and thirty years old. I'm sure that Eve was happy about that decision by Adam also. I mean after all they were both created around the same time. Even if it was a few years apart, having a child at the age of one hundred and twenty eight I'm sure was not on Eve's top ten to due list. It probably was not even on the top one to do list at that age. So you see my friend, when God said that he made his creation in six days and rested the seventh in his time he probable did. But in our time it was a lot longer or shorter I'm sure. Because all of that is told in God's time not ours, and God's time is not our time.

Now in regards to how you understand the Body, Soul and Spirit makes no difference to me. The important thing is that we end up at the finish line in the end. If you can understand your illustration of the Trinity better as a way of understanding man being in the image of God, this is fine with me. So let's look at what you said here.

As far as man being the image of God, this is what I believe:

When God said, "Let us make man in (OUR) image", who is he referring to by saying "our"? "OUR" is obviously plural... so he must be referring to the TRINITY:
1.)The Invisible Father - (Spirit) ...No one has seen God the Father, and no one CAN see Him but the Son. Jn 1:18.
2.) The Holy SPIRIT - (Soul)
3.) The SON - (Body).. "The Image of the Invisible God." Col 1:15

So when we read, "Let us make man in OUR image" we see that we are a representation of his image and likeness:
We are made up of a BODY, SOUL, and SPIRIT.

What you are saying here my friend is the same thing that I said, just on a lower scale. How do I know this? Well 1. Nobody has seen the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) Why have they not seen the Trinity? Because it is God, and God makes up the Trinity. All three parts.
2.The Trinity because it is God, no one can see him, because God is a Spirit. God is not a person. God is not a angel. God is a Spirit. This is something that we can not change no matter how hard or how badly we may want to change it, we can't. God is a Spirit. Jesus says so himself in John 4:24 "God is a Spirit". Now, since God is a Spirit, so is the Trinity. God is three Spirit's combined into one Spirit. Just like I am three people combined into one person. In the Trinity God is God the Father (and God the Spirit) God the Son (and God the Spirit) and God the Holy Spirit (and God the Spirit). Just like in this world I am the husband to my wife (while being Dave) the father to my son (while being Dave) the son to my mother (and still being Dave). Nowhere close to being like the Trinity, but it makes good for a simple example.

The invisible Father (Spirit) as you say no one can see. The Holy Spirit (Soul) nobody can see this either. And finally the Son (Body) or as you said the image of the invisible God. Nobody has seen him either. He is the Comforter as Jesus calls him sent in his place by the Father. In the beginning when God made this creation of man kind these three things (the Trinity) was not on this earth, but it was in heaven and in the creation. When God created Adam and Eve in the beginning and put them together, he created them using these three things. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit, better known as the Trinity. We are all made up of this Trinity which is a Spirit, because Jesus said that God is a Spirit and we can't change that no matter how much we want to. This Trinity which we are made up of is the Exact Perfect Imagine of God. And through this Perfect Image God Put Together two people and made them one flesh. All being done through a Spiritual transformation by the Loving had of God.

God Bless

Dave

[BCF]

Whenever a marriage between believers falls apart it is easy to use the excuse that God didn't bring it together in the first place; otherwise it wouldn't have fallen apart. So then there is no absolute criteria of determining what God has joined together. It ends up being what the individual decides at any time after the marriage. This is not at all the implication in what Jesus said.

By your above statement it leads to the belief that any "marriage" between unbelievers cannot be what God has joined together. Alyssa brought up this point by pointing out that John reproved Herod concerning what God said was lawful.

A main reason why Christians have died at the hands of unbelievers has been because those unbelievers have become offended after having been reproved by Christians citing the unbelievers' behaviour as being unlawful after God's law.

The document in post 32 of this thread addresses the belief that Jesus' teachings on divorce/remarriage apply only to believers. It manifests that belief to be nonsensical.

A marriage between two believers should not fall apart. Although it does because one party falls away from God and refuses to return back to him. But when two believer get married there total focus is on God and God first. Not themselves, not their jobs, not their money, not their parents, not their friend, not anyone or anything, but God. Nothing comes between them and the relationship that they have with God. That marriage will not ever be broken. Not because I said so, but because God so.

When God does something, it does not fall apart. When man does something, it will always fall apart.

[BCF]

paintdiva

Besides, there is no way possible that I was created in His image

There is my friend if you believe in the Trinity. Because the Trinity was there in the Creation and it was already in tact. The Trinity was who made creation, and it was all done on a Spiritual level, and so is life.

[VerticalReality]

By your above statement it leads to the belief that any "marriage" between unbelievers cannot be what God has joined together. Alyssa brought up this point by pointing out that John reproved Herod concerning what God said was lawful.

And I've already addressed why John the Baptist confronted Herod about what was lawful. Herod was under the law of Moses, and John the Baptist confronted him with the law that says in Leviticus 20:21 that a man shall not take his brother's wife because it is unclean and he is uncovering his brother's nakedness. When you make reference to John the Baptist and his confrontation with Herod and what was unlawful, you are simply defending the law of Moses, and you are not making reference whatsoever to what Jesus was teaching in Matthew 5 or 19. That is simply applying something to that situation that was never intended. John the Baptist was under the law of Moses as well, which is why he confronted Herod with that law in order to correct him about his actions.

Herod is not an applicable example for you to be using here.

The fact is here that my point of view harmonizes with Scripture. Your view accuses Moses of allowing sin under a law that Scripture says is holy. I refuse to believe Moses is allowing sin with the law he is giving. That simply defeats the entire purpose of the law. The law was to show us our sin, not allow us to commit sin.

[BCF]

My Friends,

As my friend Alyssa S pointed out in one of their replies, in Colossians 1:15 the writer Paul explains to us how Jesus the Son is the image of the invisible God. Which is all true and would link Jesus into the Trinity as the Son. But what I want to do is go on with what Paul is saying and show how it not only links Jesus with the Trinity, but it also links us at birth to Gods Image, because of the Trinity.

Starting with Colossians 1:15-18 Paul writes, 15."Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16.For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him. 17.And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18.And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."

John backs up these words when he writes in John 1:1-5.
1."In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2.The same was in the beginning with God. 3.All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4.In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5.And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."

In these verses lies the answers to Marriage and Divorce today. Marriage was and still is a creation by God for His Glory. God does this by Putting Two Spirits together that God has created and makes them one Flesh ( For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him (Colossians 1:16.) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made (John 1:3). If the leaders of today's world could just understand to teach couples that Marriage is a creation for Gods Glory only, by using these very verses, there would be no Divorce and Remarriage in this world. Simply because their would be no unequally yoked marriages in this world. God created marriage in the very beginning to help God, not to help man. All the propaganda that you hear today as to what a marriage is has nothing to do with these verses. Most of the time the first thing that is said is Love. Man you must promise to love your wife and women you must promise to love your husband. These people agree to do this and they don't even know how to love themselves. This makes no sense. How is someone going to love someone else if they can't even love themselves right? Then to top it all of they want to promise until death do them part, and they don't even realize that they are already dead. Not in the physical, but in the most important place that they need to be alive. With God. Then they want to try and say that they were married under the mighty hand of God. This makes no sense. Then when they get divorced the church and the Christian wants to sit back and hollow at them, and tell them how wrong they are, when they should not have been married in the first place. Because they did not know why marriage was created in the first place, and this makes no sense either.

Then you got people saying that you can't get remarried because of this verse and that verse, and Paul said this and Jesus said that, and nobody is bothering to look at these verses and what God created and why God created it. It's not about us my friends. This is about God and His Glory. God is looking to built a army of people filled with the Holy Spirit to stand up and Fight for Him. God created Marriage because Two people are better then One. God created the women to stand by her husband and be his helper. Well what good is God's creation during Him if they are not getting married because of a mistake they made in the flesh. God's got a lot of single men and women out in this world who are lonely and are in need of a helper. We as followers of Our Lord need to stop putting these people who have made mistakes in the flesh under bondage and let God take control and teach them why God created Marriage in the first place and help lead them to whoever God has for them, so God can increase His Army.

By doing this we may not be able to stop the Marriage and Divorce on slot that is sweeping the earth today. But we sure can stop adding to the pain that goes with it, and maybe restore Peace and Love into the Hearts of those who have made the mistakes in the flesh, so that they can go on and enjoy the Love that God does have for them. Marriage just like everything else on this earth including you and me (mankind) was created for God and for God's Glory. Everything was created by Him and for Him only, not for us, and that includes Marriage. The Trinity was there in the beginning, it is here now, and it will be here forever. We were a part of that creation then and are a part of that creation now because of the Trinity. The only way we can change that is if we change God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, and say that He was not there at the beginning, so he may not be here now. Well I'm sorry, He was present then and He is Present now. The scriptures that I started out with prove that, and we can't change it. Nothing comes into this would without the mighty hand of God attached to it. Nobody can escape the Spirit of God. Because He Is Everywhere.

God Bless

Dave

[deepjagga]

Finally someone with honesty to see that the two accounts, Matthews and Marks contradict.
But they do so only IF putting away for fornication means for adultery.

The whole pont of the document in the first post is to show that putting away for fornication DOES NOT mean putting away for adultery.

Reading Mark 10 2-12 and Luke 16: 18 is the plain and simple truth.
The complexity caused by the cultural issue of how they "divorced" before they got married "put away for fornication" does not contradict the simplicity of Mark 10:2-12 1 Cor 7:39

Read Mark 10:2-12. Believe it in all its implications. You are then wiser than the high ranking theologians who in ignorance cannot agree with Jesus as he plainly spoke in that passage.
The exception clause does not contradict because the exception does not pertain to the married state but to the betrothed.
Please read the first post.

Christians tend to keep themselves bond by marriage, divorce, fornication, adultery, and so many other things. They hold themselves to a much higher standard than the heathans and others, yet their marriges are filled with stepsons, stepdaughters, visitation rights, child support orders, spousel support, etc... Some times it appears as if the entire marriage realm of society is messed up-especially where the Christian churches are concerned.

As far as Moses giving a bill of divorce for the hardness of one's heart, there are many times now days where divorce is very peaceful. There is no hardening of the heart at all, poeple simply checked with their inner child and it told them they weren't being loved like they deserved to be, it told them there were way too many irreconsolable differences there, and that the marriage was a mistake or it was the wrong time for marriage.

This confuses it even more that despite what Jesus
says about marriage, divorce, adultery, etc... the
Bible also says, "Obey the laws of the land." The
law makes all types of divorces legal-simple as that.

Everything is a business decision now days. The marriage and especially the divorce and remarriage-all business decisions. People rarely pay any attention to the stuff that's in the Bible-which is a bit confusing. This is a feel-good generation. If it feels good-we do it. If it doesn't feel good-we get away from it. Whereas people back in the 40's, 50's, and 60's would stay together no matter how bad someone abused them verbally and physically, no matter how many times their husbands slept with their daughters, nor how often their wives sold their bodies...they kept those messed-up marriages together. We don't do that anymore-thank God.

[Alaska]

"Obey the laws of the land." The
law makes all types of divorces legal-simple as that.

The laws of the land that contradict the laws of God are not to be respected by Christians. Signing a divorce paper that says the couple are no longer husband and wife is spitting in Jesus' face because he said "let not man put asunder" and he taught that if either one divorces and marries another it is adultery. It is adultery because the divorce does not change the fact that the Word of God has pronounced them husband and wife until one of them is dead. The law of the land says one thing and the NT law says another. Will we serve the "god of this world" Lucifer, or Jesus the Creator?

[Alaska]

Herod is not an applicable example for you to be using here.

First of all tell me what proof you have that Herod was a Jew.


1 Cor. 7:
39 The 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.


Paul, like John the Baptist knew that the real truth concerning marriage is found in Gen. 2 as was confirmed by Jesus. Malachi also referred to Gen 2 and concludes that God hates divorce, which also demotes Deut. 24:1-4 from the assumed status of it being the truth. Hence Pauls reference to the law binding the woman to her husband for as long as he lives shows his understanding that the provision made in Deut. 24:1-4 was a temporary allowance that was not the truth.

It is true that Moses allowed it, but it is not an absolute moral truth because it was written for the hardness of their hearts and is contrary to the meaning of Gen 2 as Jesus revealed its meaning by concluding, "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder". Allowing divorce in the NT is in direct contradiction to Jesus and the real meaning of Gen 2.

"For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ"

But separation is allowable and sometimes necessary. But even then the separated are not to get remarried but are to either be reconciled or live a single type of life. Unlike divorce, separation is not a declaration that the couple are no longer husband and wife. Making such a declaration is denying Jesus' words.

[Alaska]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaska
This is an assumption. The NT does not say this

Actually, your opinion is an assumption as well derived by your own interpretation of the Scriptures. Many believe that the NT does say exactly what was quoted above. It is your own interpretation that argues. However, many here do not believe your interpretation is correct, so therefore it won't be taken as infallible.

The belief that the phrase "except it be for fornication" means "except it be for adultery" is an assumption. "Adultery" is a specific sexual offence as it violates a marriage. The precise word to use if adultery was a grounds for divorce is "adultery". You are assuming that fornication in 5:32 and 19:9 means adultery.
Sometimes the word fornication and adultery are listed side by side indicating difference of meaning.

[BCF]

Alaska

Let me ask you something if I may, you keep quoting this one verse of scripture "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder" and then point back to Genesis 2. I'm just wondering if you even know what God has joined together in the first place in Genesis 2?

The reason I ask is because you seem to quote this a lot but you don't give any explanation as to why you are quoting it. You see you can't say Christians because Adam and Eve were not Christians. I don't find that in the Bible. You also can't say believers because they deliberately went against what God told them to do when the ate from that tree. Now I presented to you already my explanation of "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder" meant to me, Now I think it is about time that you give us (or at least me) what yours is. Simply because anyone can though scripture around without giving an explanation as to why they are saying it.


I shall wait for your reply

God Bless

Dave

[Amazedgrace21]

The belief that the phrase "except it be for fornication" means "except it be for adultery" is an assumption. "Adultery" is a specific sexual offence as it violates a marriage. The precise word to use if adultery was a grounds for divorce is "adultery". You are assuming that fornication in 5:32 and 19:9 means adultery.
Sometimes the word fornication and adultery are listed side by side indicating difference of meaning.

Well we agree on this point at least..
What I can not agree with is the fact if we simply use the KJV for each passage in Matthew, Mark and Luke, for the sake of continuity..

There are specific verses you are completley disregarding in Matthew that harmonize the context of Marks account, as well as Lukes and ignore that Christ "permited" what he called "lawful", while he set the record straight what was lawful..as in "permitted" by God..permitted by Moses to allow "lawfully" under God's authority..

Jesus "precisely" used the word "fornicate..fornication..the sin of an immorality,against a spouse from God's perspective between two marired partners ..was what God permitted to take apart that which He put together, he did not want to see this happen, hates it when it does.

God also hates and opposes what men set forth as permissable to take apart their marraiges, God had put together..

The "asunderers" were the ones "guilty of fornicating"..the unlawful ones, were the ones , taking apart the sanctity of being made one..cleaving with another other their spouse, among other immoral behaviors..

"divorcing for 'any reasons', above , beyond and outside, apart from that which God set apart, was not permitted and permission at all, WAS ONLY FOR the other spouse, the innocent spouse .."fornification" while married..was a cause Christ said Himself, was lawful to "put away", to obtain a divorce from the sinful spouse, for the innocent spouse. ( and legally required to prevent adultery, legally.)

Jesus did not say..just and ONLY seperation was allowed, it was also permitted as was a "lawful" divorce ALSO PERMITTED and 'lawful" before God as was granted the authority from God, to permit, and what Jesus upheld as well..because it was.

Read it again..what you are saying is not scriptural, its an opinion not set forth in Christ's own words..or supported by scripture, but conforming scripture to your opinions here.

What Christ says In Matthew ..about divorce.."putting away" a spouse:

3The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him,

Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every casue? ( emphasis is upon , "for any/every cause" in Matthew..)


4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 7They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9And I say unto you,( Jesus say's) Whosoever shall put away his wife,( put's away a wife he is married to, puts away as in divorce to the wife married to, not simply engaged to") except it be for fornication, ( fornification ..not specifically and only adultery,,but "fornification..as in immorality) and shall marry another, ( anticipates remarraige) committeth adultery:

( stipulates adultery occurring because)

A. the divorce was not casued by fornification, 'as in am immorality B.no divorce is permitted unless there is fornification C.no divorce that is not permitted by God, is a divorce at all, the couple is still married..before God. D. If there is no sanctioned divorce that permits remarraige so there is no sanctioned remarraige, and that is why it is called adultery when a married partner "cleaves" with someone else and is not divorced.. E. A "divorce" permited by God, for the innocent party , permits the innocent party to remarry. They can not be found guilty of adultery becaause they are no longer married in the eyes of God becuse he permitted what he put together to be taken apart "by Him". Furthermore..when the disciples said..better to not marry..as in "remarry", if permitted (v.10) ....Christ said.unless one is built to be a Eunech..it is better to "remarry".. and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. 10His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
12For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake.

He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

( is able to remain unmarried , fine and good, but if not able, still fine and good , to"remarry")

Luke says:

16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from [her] husband committeth adultery.

again, a man who does not "put his wife away lawfully as in Mark..or for "any cause" as in Matthew, except for "fornification- immorality , THis is a man who is not lawfully divorced, because this was not a divorce, putting away that God permitted for the reasons why God does and will..just this mans reasons, which are for the guilty parties reasons,

These reason ( excuses) do not satsify God's standards or are "His reasons" for permitting divorce for the innocent party..so if either remarry and aren't lawfully divorced, both commit adultery)

Mark says:

2And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.

The emphasis is upon lawful

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.

Jesus said, yes it is lawful, it was lawful, or Moses would not have said so..itis only "lawful" for the cause God permit's divorce"..God does not desire for any marraige to fail..but there are those who "do".."fornicate..are immoral"
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.

( If, there is going to be a divorce permited by God, it is only for the reasons He will permit it, not for "any/every cause, as in any reasons,but for one very specific reason..and for the innocent party, (not the guilty one) God does permit divorce to be lawful, and also for the innocent party, to remarry.They are not required to stay ONLY seperated or to never remarry ..See Matthew 19 for "the cause")
10And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.

The answer is directed to the guilty party, a husband (and man) who "unlawfully" divorces his wife before God..and why even though he has "put her away", he remains "married and is an adulterer, the second marraige can't be entered into BECAUSE there was no "fornification - immorality cause on the part of the innocent wife in this scenario..

and the same applies to her, if she does the same..becasue inthose days, it waspossible for a wife to "divorce", or put away her husband, obviously)
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.

The man that God says may not "put asunder" what God has brought together is the party "putting away" for any reason except what God permits a marraige to be taken apart By Him..divorce is permitted under circumstances God provides as lawful as is remarraige..

and that is "fornification..immorality"..and adultery is one form of immorality ..which occurs in marraige as it applies to divorce, and not restricted to only an "engagement" where no "marraige" had occured.

One can not commit adultery if they are not married..one can commit immorality and also adultery when married, which falls under "fornification"...per Christ.

[VerticalReality]

First of all tell me what proof you have that Herod was a Jew.

Here's an article on Herod Antipas

http://www.livius.org/he-hg/herodian...d_antipas.html

1 Cor. 7:
39 The 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.

So, how can the law both allow divorce and also condemn it?

Paul, like John the Baptist knew that the real truth concerning marriage is found in Gen. 2 as was confirmed by Jesus.

So what you're saying is that Moses just didn't know the real truth?

Malachi also referred to Gen 2 and concludes that God hates divorce, which also demotes Deut. 24:1-4 from the assumed status of it being the truth.

Perhaps you can point out the Scripture that "demotes" anything concerning the law other that the Scriptures that refer to those who are born again under the law of grace?

Hence Pauls reference to the law binding the woman to her husband for as long as he lives shows his understanding that the provision made in Deut. 24:1-4 was a temporary allowance that was not the truth.

That is your understanding, but I believe your understanding is faulty here. There is no indication anywhere in Scripture that Deuteronomy 24 was a temporary allowance. What other laws do you believe are temporary?

It is true that Moses allowed it, but it is not an absolute moral truth because it was written for the hardness of their hearts and is contrary to the meaning of Gen 2 as Jesus revealed its meaning by concluding, "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder". Allowing divorce in the NT is in direct contradiction to Jesus and the real meaning of Gen 2.

So what happens to those today who still have hardened hearts?

Why do you insist that Moses was allowing sin? What Scripture anywhere in the bible do you see that states Moses allowed sin? Can you give one other example outside of your views on marriage? Why would Moses allow sin in regards to marriage but he wouldn't allow sin anywhere else?

But separation is allowable and sometimes necessary. But even then the separated are not to get remarried but are to either be reconciled or live a single type of life. Unlike divorce, separation is not a declaration that the couple are no longer husband and wife. Making such a declaration is denying Jesus' words.

So why do you believe Moses allowed a sinful "declaration"?

[VerticalReality]

The belief that the phrase "except it be for fornication" means "except it be for adultery" is an assumption. "Adultery" is a specific sexual offence as it violates a marriage. The precise word to use if adultery was a grounds for divorce is "adultery". You are assuming that fornication in 5:32 and 19:9 means adultery.
Sometimes the word fornication and adultery are listed side by side indicating difference of meaning.

I understand that, Alaska, but how can the husband be guilty of adultery if he marries another if he's not truly married to begin with? If he's not truly married wouldn't he be guilty of fornication as you claim here?