• Children, PUT AWAY your toys, it’s time for school.
  • PUT AWAY your gun

Or, is it:

  • Children, DIVORCE your toys, it’s time for school
  • DIVORCE your gun

Or, does it matter?

Sin can only be defined as what the Law of Moses states. There is no other way to define sin, but by the law of Moses. So, to teach that divorce/remarriage is a sin, that is a travesty. The burden of life long guilt trips of something false weighs more on a person than anything. Frivolous teaching that one can spend eternity in hell for divorcing/remarrying is an evil teaching that no one needs.

Whatever reason that people divorce, it’s allowed. And we need to stay out of it, because it’s none of our business.

What defines sin?

Romans 3:20
for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Sin cannot be invented, modified, or changed. It’s the law.  For example, picking your nose is not a sin.  But, I’m sure that someone has deemed it a sin, all because someone thinks that picking your nose is impolite, or something like that.  To others, farting is a sin.  These are both man made invented sins.

Divorce/remarriage is not a sin to begin with, so how can it be advocated that it is a sin now?

Divorce/remarriage is not a sin in the law of Moses, and neither is it in 1 Cor 7.

Some wish to interpret 1 Cor 7 as a commandment that if violated will send your wife to hell.

And that is what this is really all about. So, they FORBID wives from divorce, threatening them with hell if they leave. Forcing them to stay, when they don’t want to.  Threats and intimidating women as to their spiritual destiny if they leave.

If one spouse is not in love, that is reason enough for a divorce. Boo-hoo for the other spouse. You can’t force anyone to love you that doesn’t, hence, hardened hearts.

1 Cor 7:39
The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth;

Do you see the words, “THE LAW” in that? What law? The Law of Moses, of course.

Another, Romans 7:2-3
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Again, if you look at Romans 7:1 it states,
(For I speak to them that know the law,)

So, Paul is taking you BACK to the Law of Moses.

Where might that law be?

Deuteronomy 24:3 is the place.
And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

Note the word, “OR”.

Deuteronomy 24:1,4 (KJV)

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.

4  Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

But wait a dog gone minute here.

What happened to verses 2 and 3?  Conveniently deleted?

Contrary to popular Christian belief, started by the Catholics, of course, it is not a sin to divorce…for any reason. Neither is it adultery to remarry.

Intro:

Major note: I use the KJV, not a modern English Translated version. Why?

For example, 1 John 3:4, in some modern English translations state that sin is lawlessness. That means what, in English? In the KJV, it states that sin is the transgression of the law. That means something significant, because according to Romans 3 and Romans 7, the law of Moses is what defines what sin is. What is the Law of Moses? It’s the Old (Not new, or renewed) covenant that spans from Exodus 20 (Not Genesis 1) thru Deuteronomy, which, I might add, includes Deuteronomy 24:1-4, the topic of divorce. It’s The Law.

In the statement by the Pharisees in:

Matthew 19:7
They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?

 

Many seem to think that Jesus changed the rules of the law in regards to divorce, and that Moses, the person, allowed, or as some state, “tolerated” divorce, against God’s will or plan, so, Jesus comes on the scene to correct that error.  But the only error is in identifying what the word, “Moses” signifies in Matthew 19:7.  Many incorrectly identify “Moses” as the person of Moses, but that is far from the truth.

The Pharisees were not discussing Moses, THE PERSON, but the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses is not an invention of Moses. The law of Moses is the Law of God, to wit:

Joshua 24:26
And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under an oak, that was by the sanctuary of the Lord.

Nehemiah 8:8
So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

Nehemiah 8:18
Also day by day, from the first day unto the last day, he read in the book of the law of God. And they kept the feast seven days; and on the eighth day was a solemn assembly, according unto the manner.

Nehemiah 10:28
And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding;

The Law of Moses is known by many names, one of which is the Law of God. Another name for the Law of Moses is, “The Law”, for which some confuse with the word “Torah”, which it isn’t. Torah begins in Genesis 1:1, whereas the Law of Moses begins in Exodus 20.

Still, other names include the words, “Book of Moses”, or, just “Moses” alone. So, we should be able to see that Matthew 19:7 is not discussing the person of Moses, but rather, the Law of Moses, or more specifically, the Law of God. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is Law.

Law is not God’s toleration of a situation, nor is it Moses tolerating a situation. Law is God commanding Moses to “write it down”, so that when the word “Moses” is mentioned, it is God’s Word, written by Moses, so it is God commanding the Children of Israel, not Moses, the person.

Hebrews 10:28
He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

Moses’ law?  Or God’s Law?

So let’s start off with a question.

Is divorce, based on Deuteronomy 24:1-4 the law of God, or a toleration of Moses?

My second question is:

Why isn’t verse 3 taught?

Deuteronomy 24:1-4 shows a, get this, twice divorced woman. Twice. Let me say that again…Twice.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4
1 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.

2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife.

3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

That shows that divorce is not a sin, and neither is, get this…remarriage.

NOTE: Some people, and theologians in particular, ERRONEOUSLY interpret the word in verse one, “uncleanness” as some sort of sexual sin, aka, adultery, or fornication. Some have interpreted this to be “some sort of ‘indecency’”. Indecency? Are you kidding? This is an anatomy issue, not a sin issue. Any interpretation of anything sexual, or sinful here is wrong, big time. This issue deals with the anatomy of the genitals, that there is something wrong with the genitals that the man does not like, stating something like, “I’m not touching that with a ten foot pole!”.

What is the punishment for adultery under Moses, uh, er, the law of Moses? Divorce? Divorce with the opportunity for remarriage? Or Death?

Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

So, let’s reword Deuteronomy 24:1-2 for a moment and see the logic in this:

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 out that she committed adultery: 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.

What? She can get a divorce and then marry someone else? How is that possible if she is supposed to be dead, according to Leviticus 20:10?

Part 2
Many years later, in the gospels, the subject of divorce is discussed…or is it?

The original question by the Pharisees had nothing to do with divorce at all. It had to do with “put away”, not divorce.

Matthew 19:3
The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?

Mark 10:2
And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.

This is where I get into theological disputes with SOME people. I use the KJV. Other versions will miss this. There is two different topics being discussed, not just one topic:
1.) Put Away, and
2.) Divorce.

They are not the same, not even the same Greek word, but the Catholics…and others, have equated them to be the same, redefining “put away” to equate it to mean the same exact thing as divorce. That is wrong.

A Put Away spouse is a separated spouse, without a divorce decree.
A divorced spouse is a put away spouse with a Certificate of Divorcement.

Isaiah 50:1
Thus saith the Lord, Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away.

NOTE: GOD PUT AWAY HIS WIFE, BUT DID NOT DIVORCE HER. This shows that put away is not divorce.

In the case of adultery, divorce is not necessary. Why? What is the penalty for adultery again? Divorce? NO NO NO. Death by stoning…even in the days of Jesus, the penalty was STILL death by stoning.

Jesus would not have told any Pharisee that people can get divorced in the case of an adulterous spouse. Never. Adulterous spouses get stoned, not divorced…that is, in the days of Jesus walking under the law himself, discussing the law with lawyers.

Can you imagine the heyday that the Pharisees would have over this one, telling lawyers that adulterous spouses no longer need to be put to death under the law, but rather that they can simply get divorced now, and not face any penalty of death?

Put away, then death is the only thing necessary for adultery. Divorce is not warranted in the case for adultery when Jesus walked the planet, as he, too, was under the Law of Moses, yet did not sin.

“PUT AWAY”, is another way of saying, KICK HER OUT OF THE HOUSE.

For any other reason, if you put away your spouse, you need that divorce decree, otherwise, you are still married. And, if you marry someone else while still being married, that is bigamy.

There is a verse that must be dissected once this is understood. The verse, already dissected, states that if a man marries a put away wife, they are committing adultery, all because the wife is still married to her so-called former husband. She never got a divorce. So, their relationship is bigamy.  Not polygamy.  Polygamy is where a man is married to two people where the first wife was NOT “put away”.

What is that verse?

Matthew 5:32
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Note:  The word “divorced” in the above should be “put away”. Note the Greek word used twice in this verse.  You will see this in the following verse.

and

Matthew 19:9
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

In these references, a man married an already still married woman. She never got a divorce yet. She was only KICKED OUT of the house (Uh, that is, PUT AWAY, aka Send Away) by her husband…without the divorce.

We can divorce for simply “hating” our spouse, as Deuteronomy 24:3 states. If Jesus didn’t love us, would we be compelled to remain married to Jesus?

But, why do theologians not want to discuss that one verse, verse 3?

Why do theologians not want to discuss that in Deuteronomy 24:1-4, that in any remarriage, NO ONE GOT KICKED OUT OF JUDAISM?

Oh, but, they want to teach us that in Christianity, people are hell bound for eternity if they get remarried? That logic, is insane.

Jesus did NOT change the rules of divorce, nor did he change the law of divorce. And again, Moses, the person, did not allow divorce. God did. He made it a law, not Moses, the person.

Hardened hearts, one may retort. Well, when did that change? Humans have hardened hearts by nature. God made a law allowing for divorce, just simply for hating your spouse. But theologians don’t want to discuss that for some reason, thinking that Jesus forbids divorce, when in fact, he forbids “put away”, WITHOUT THE CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCEMENT.

Now, in regards to 1 Corinthians 7, we are not to PUT AWAY our spouse, but the spouse is FREE TO LEAVE. The choices after she leaves…divorce her, or reconcile with her. Both parties here are believers, where not one party is an unbeliever. A separate verse addresses where one spouse is an unbeliever.

NOTE: Both parties here are believers. In the law of Moses, when a divorce happened, neither spouse was kicked out of Judaism, right? RIGHT.

Now, in regards to 1 Cor 7:10-11…Let not…but if she…let her

Don’t let her go, but if she leaves, divorce her or reconcile with her. (She can leave your sorry butt!). 1 Cor 7:10-11 is to BELIEVERS. Both remain a Christian even if she leaves.

That’s all that means. But like I already said, the Catholics, and others think that it states that she can never marry again.

Again, the two choices when both parties are believers, reconcile or divorce, but don’t “PUT AWAY”. Why? Because she can leave on her own accord without the husband kicking her out. And guess what? She can remarry, and still be in the family of Christians, a Child of Jesus.

Therefore, I disagree with the theologians that put restrictions on people getting a divorce, even those who think that the only reason to divorce is for abuse. A Christian can get divorced for just for not being in love anymore. But we never seem to hear preaching on verse 3 of Deuteronomy 24 from the theologians. That is interesting since they believe that an adulterous spouse under the law of Moses can get remarried.

And for those who think that God hates divorce, in the KJV it does not say that. It states that God hates “PUT AWAY”, not divorce.

Malachi 2:16
For the Lord, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away

Remember, Joseph was going to”put away” his fiance’, quietly. Why quietly? Because her pregnancy would be evidence of adultery, and based on evidence, she would be killed…not allowed to marry another person.

This is what the Law states in regards to the situation that the betrothed Mary was in:

Deuteronomy 22:13-21 (KJV)

13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,

14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:

15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:

16 And the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;

17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.

18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;

19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.

20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

She does not divorce…she dies. In Mary’s case, she is pregnant. That is all the evidence that is needed for a conviction of death…not a divorce. Betrothed adulterers were put to death.

So, again, why they don’t preach verse 3 of Deuteronomy 24? What do you do with a married couple that at least one party just isn’t in love anymore? Keep them in bondage because they think that Jesus only sanctions divorce in adultery, abuse and abandonment issues? Really?

Do we not get it yet that there is no such thing as a divorce, let alone a remarriage, for the case of “sexual immorality”? It’s just death. Being stoned is the means of death for sexual immorality, until you are dead. The subject of Deuteronomy 24:1 has nothing to do with sexual immorality, or as some have translated it to be, “indecency” to begin with, and even if it did, verse 2 is NOT ALLOWED, which proves that their theology is wrong in this regard.

To review, the original question by the Pharisees had nothing to do with divorce, but “PUT AWAY” (AKA Send away), is that the Pharisees were allowing “send away” for any reason, not requiring a divorce. And THAT alone is what causes adultery when the sent away spouse “marries” another person, because that “another” person is really an additional person. The old marriage was not severed by divorce.

This is the basis for my argument, because there is no such thing as a divorce for the cause of adultery in the days of Jesus. No such thing. It’s just death.

Christians can get divorced, where both parties are believers, where no abuse issues are going on, simply for not being in love anymore, just like Deuteronomy 24:3 states.

“Put away” is the only conclusion for an adulterous spouse, therefore, put away and divorce cannot be equated. The only authorized reason to put away is in the case of adultery, then death. For any other cause, you must not only put away, but divorce as well.

In the days of Jesus (Jesus was talking to lawyers here), the law states death penalty, point blank. We do remember the woman caught in adultery that was going to be stoned to death, and Jesus made a point to say “He who is without sin, cast the first stone.”

And, I reference the following already:

Hebrews 10:28
He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

It was Jesus who showed mercy, not the people, not the Pharisee’s, nor the rabbi’s, or anyone else. The Law does not allow for a divorce, let alone a remarriage for an adulterous spouse.

Also note: One reason for divorce, according to Deu 24 is just because the husband didn’t like his wife very much. So, what do you do if a spouse does not love the other? Forbid a divorce when Deu 24:3 allows for it?

JESUS would never allow for a divorce for an adulterous spouse. Dead people cannot divorce, let alone remarry.

The Catholics really screwed this one up, and the Reformation folks bought off on it.

Advertisements