Divorce and remarriage. Part II. Dismissing a woman without a divorce letter and the Jesus trap.

Before I introduce part two, I want to add at the outset that one of the reasons for writing this, and there were at least 3-5, was to help a couple I respect I have been praying for a resolution to their case for about a year, two years. And guess what, God has shown again that the Truth is in the Scriptures. You can wait yourself years for an answer, but it's all in Scripture. Of course sometimes we get from people, situations, etc., but in such matters we must be sure of the Law of God.

I prayed, and God directed me to explore this topic not limited to the possibility of divorce and remarriage.

By the way, everyone has a gift from God in building the kingdom of heaven. Today I read and realized that Magda, my heart sister from IR has the gift of intercession. I read that such people gifted with the gift of intercession make better contact with God than others. However, God gives gifts to everyone. He is better than a million so-called Santas:

 

 

 

“Różne są dary łaski, lecz ten sam Duch; 5 There are also different kinds of ministry, but one Lord; 6 different at last are the actions, but the same God, the author of all in all. 7 And the Spirit is revealed to all for the [common] good. 8 To one is given by the Spirit the gift of wisdom² words, the other the ability to know² by the same Spirit, 9 to another the gift of faith³ in the same Spirit, to another the grace to heal in the one Spirit, 10 to another the gift of miracles, to another prophecy⁴another recognizing ghosts⁴, another the gift of tongues⁴ and finally to another the grace of language translation⁴. 11 Wszystko zaś sprawia jeden i ten sam Duch, udzielając każdemu tak, jak chce. ” 1 Kor. 

 

I have an awareness blog, but I know others have different gifts, and we are all one body.

 

 

All parts of this consideration will be mainly aimed at freeing people from the yoke of religion. From the satanic accusations of sanctimonious men thinking that a Christian has no possibility of divorce. The text is to show how the Jews led the women into a satanic trap by not giving a letter of divorce. Ultimately it has a political dimension.

 

_____________________________

 

Apostasy is a word used to write a divorce document. It comes from the combination of two words : apo meaning away, far, and stasis - meaning to stand, establish.

This phrase "divorce letter" appears three times in the New Testament :

Matthew 5.31

Matthew 19.7

Mark 10.4

Note that when a divorce letter is mentioned in these passages, it is also combined with a reference, a dismissal.

So "apostasy" means to write a divorce document, while "apeluo" (a word unfortunately mistranslated in some translations) means to send away, that is, to physically dismiss someone.

Apeluo = separation, separation, distancing from home

Apostasy = divorce

Both of these words are very important when it comes to divorce.

Let's turn to Matthew 19. Why is the location where the Lord Jesus worked described at the beginning? He was healing people in that region.

Jesus had reached the borderlands of Judea. In Judea, Jesus' earlier cousin, John the Baptist was beheaded. John's crime was to be called an open critic of the immoral marriage of Herod, who had taken as his wife, the wife of his brother Philip. It was forbidden in Jewish law to take his brother's wife. Although Herod was the king of the Jews, he acted in this matter as did the Romans . But when he appeared before the Jews, he kept the Law of Moses. John spoke of Herod's hypocrisy. Philip divorced his wife by verbally declaring it to her. This was the obligatory way of divorcing in Rome. However, this treatment of divorce was not accepted as to Jewish women according to the Mosaic Law.

Interesting fact : a Greek or Roman wife could divorce her husband. She could dismiss him from her home - apeluo. There is no record of a Hebrew woman being able to do such a thing. In Jewish law, a woman had few rights.

The reason for this is described in Genesis 3 - where the fall of the first humans is described. Adam obeyed his woman instead of listening to God. Therefore, Eve was put in subjection to the man. Therefore, a woman's rights were greatly reduced in the Jews.

We are not certain at 100% that Philip divorced his wife in the Roman way. But we do know that Herod did not follow the Law of Moses.

In verse three the Pharisees step in, Who, as usual, want to catch Jesus in the Word. We know that the dismissal of a wife in the Mosaic Law had to be accompanied by the giving of a letter. The Pharisees ask if it is possible to send a wife away just like that for any reason. They specifically omitted in their question, the issue of giving a divorce letter. Why did they do it? Well, because under Roman law, it was a practice that was most permissible. At that time, the Pharisees and Sadducees were debating whether it was possible to divorce for any reason, or only when immorality was involved. What they were really asking was whether it was lawful to send away one's wife.

 

Note now an important point. Very important.

 

If Jesus had said that it was possible but a letter had to be given, then the Pharisees would have brought up Herod's case and would have reported Jesus as accusing Herod and his marriage to Herodias. In this way they would trap Jesus into being against the Roman law and bring him before Herod, Who, ironically, is called the king of the Jews. They hoped that he would treat the Lord Jesus as he did John the Baptist.

If Jesus had agreed with them that it was correct to send his wife away, they would have accused him of going against the Law of Moses. Then, they would have brought Him before the Sanhedrin and He would have been crucified.

It is as if the Pharisees were giving Jesus a choice :

1. choose the Roman law - so you will be against the Mosaic law - you will face the Sanhedrin and crucifixion ;

2. choose the Law of Moses - you will be brought before Herod - you will face death by beheading.

In the Bible (Matt. 19.3) it says that the Pharisees tempted Jesus. The same word is used when describing Satan's temptation in the wilderness.

The Pharisees sought to discredit Jesus, to stop His mission.

Jesus is wise and does not give them a straight answer. We have Jesus' answer in Matthew 19.4-9. Jesus goes back to the Torah, to Genesis. Then Jesus says something that is not written in the Torah. He says : "What therefore God has joined together, let man not separate."

He said this on purpose to provoke them to reply. And they answer : "But why did Moses command to give a letter of divorce and to dismiss?" Wonderfully Jesus conducted this conversation. It was the Pharisees who now invoked the Law of Moses themselves. This did not come from the mouth of Jesus, but from the mouth of the Pharisees.

Jesus' further statement is phenomenal : Matthew 19.8-9 .

Here Jesus is no longer talking about the divorce itself but about the repudiation and "shackling" of the woman, the refusal to give a letter of divorce. What Jesus said here is a revolution, because before only the woman was considered an adulteress if she did not get a divorce letter. Now Jesus is talking about the man's responsibility. Before, such an act was not considered adultery by the man. Dismissing a woman without a letter and marrying another is bigamy.

Many people, based on the above verses, claim that divorce and remarriage is adultery according to the Lord Jesus.

In fact, the word "apostasia" does not appear anywhere in Matthew 19.

We must understand that the Pharisees wanted to trap Jesus by asking the question in a sneaky way.

 

 

_______________

Trochę poza tematem; chciałem Was poinformować, że środowisko umownie rzecz biorąc  chrześcijan w internecie jest bardzo zazdrosne. Kiedyś czytałem na jednym z portali anglojęzycznych, jak to pastorzy podkradają sobie nauczania. Ciężko mi było w to uwierzyć, ale wczoraj otrzymałem informacje o tym, że ktoś z mojej “konkurencji”, która  nie jest, poszedł tym samym tropem wg niego i umieścił podobny tekst, ale polityczny.

 

Well, there was a discussion on the blog a few years back about Israel being an adulterous wife. I know that my blog is constantly watched. I don't watch these people unless someone gives me info in an email or on a messenger. It's just thatuna.

Panowie XY, ten tekst nie jest polityczny, choć jeden z wątków będzie taki własnie. To rozważanie ma wiele celów. Pewien bloger kompletnie stracił w moich oczach umieszczając tekst nawiązujący do części już następnego dnia po moim tekście. Okazuje się, że nie gramy w jednej drużynie….

That X who posted text Y was scolded by the same man who once scolded me. I could have used that as competition, but I didn't. I did not add to the stove.

Porażka… Czasem brzydzę się chrześcijaństwem. Żebym był dobrze zrozumiany: chrześcijaństwem, a nie naśladowcami Jezusa.

The same way a man probably from the US reads me, where once he is Amanda and once he is Stefan and spouts hatred towards me because he is a Catholic hating Protestant, but still reads the blog. The problem is that all hate is from the wrong people. Even if it has a legitimate basis. We are to love our enemies and hate evil. This man has never met Jesus. Just yesterday I had to delete his stupid comment for the hundredth time contributing nothing.

 

The worst thing is when someone fools themselves into thinking they are a follower of Jesus.

 

Back to the text. The novelty of this consideration at this stage shows that the Jews as the bride can marry Jesus a second time as the bridegroom. The divorce was with the Father, and the new union with the Son. You are unlikely to read about this anywhere, and why, in the texts to come.

This is all very important for those living in the shackles of bad teaching.

 

Keep reading this thread because it's going to be hot.

Praise the Lord Jesus.