Adultery vs Fornication

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by Antipas

Good evening, Ehud! I pray that this Friday has been blessing to you.

...

Thank you so much for the response! I very much appreciate your time and the tone you have kept throughout this thread.

God bless, friend!

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Antipas

Good evening, Ehud! I pray that this Friday has been blessing to you.

Before I share my thoughts on this I want to emphasize that my intention isn't to shame or berate anyone. I'm human. My understanding could be wrong, and I'm still learning. I'm only sharing what I have heard taught and what my own studies have led me to believe.

I believe that marriage is an indissoluble bond. Unless one's first spouse is dead, one commits adultery if they remarry another. The exceptions tend to muddy the waters and complicate things because the questions always begin to move away from the mark, the reconciliation of divorcees. What about sexually unfaithful spouses? What about unbelieving spouses? What about abusive spouses? What about spouses who snore? The questions and exceptions seem to drift from what we all know is God's perfect will... a lifetime bond with divorcees reconciled.

With that being said, I take the position that remarriage is always adultery. No exceptions. This way God's perfect will is firmly established and crystal clear.

The glitch is that man is fallen and a sinner by nature. We are but flesh. If a spouse remarries, or just refuses to reconcile, we become lonely. We begin to struggle with passions and deep unfulfilled emotions. And being human, we will more times than not, seek companionship and marry another.

But God's will is God's will. No matter how sincere our intentions, it is what it is. And so, when we marry another, we close the door on God's will. We marry and enter into a second indissoluble bond upon consummation and are now one flesh with yet a third human being. Now we have committed adultery. Most in today's world absolutely don't want to believe or accept this. They want what feels fair to them. They really don't are that God never willed them to have another spouse. They really don't care that God's will is that they reconcile with the their first spouse, the spouse of their youth, their first love.

So, this sense of wanting what feels "fair" and feeling "entitled" blurs our vision and we drift from seeing God's will... even if it is impossible.

And being but flesh, and having passions, and emotional needs... many buy into interpretations that bless the idea of marrying again. Some know it is sin... and yet they still break down and remarry.

At the end of the day... the majority of divorcees marry again. The reality of this doesn't negate it being a sin. And when one marries another they enter into an additional indissoluble bond with this second spouse, and in the process they commit adultery against the first spouse. In a very real sense they have become serial polygamists.

In our culture it is common to argue that one is somehow justified to do something someone really desires to do. And people have very creative and truly intellectual sounding justifications, especially when it comes to divorce and remarriage.

My concern is the soul. How will one stand before God having engaged in such a binding adultery... after a lifetime of excuses and justifications? Would it not be better to just be broken? Wouldn't it be better to confess one's weakness, and confess this sin to God in a spirit of broken contrition and remorseful humility?

I believe so. And I believe that God forgives. I believe that God not only forgives, but God gives both mercy and grace to those broken over their sin. Mercy is God not imposing upon us what we deserve. And grace is giving us the blessings and favor that we do not deserve. And so, I believe that if confession is made before God, with true heartfelt contrition and brokenness, God's grace and mercy can bring blessing, sanctity, and favor to a second marriage that would have otherwise been brazen adultery in His eyes.

So, yes. If one who has divorced their first spouse and married another wishes to be right with God, they absolutely must confess the sin and seek God's grace and mercy. If they don't, I do believe that the sin will be counted against them in the Judgment. Now, will they lose reward and still be saved, yet so as by fire? Will they lose their soul? I don't know. Maybe it depends on their disposition. How God judges sin among the saints is entirely His prerogative. I'm not God. I'm just sharing what I believe and my intentions are not to hurt anyone's feelings or to condemn. I'm only pointing out what I believe to be a serious sin, and I'm also pointing out a way to be made white as snow.

I pray you can see or feel my heart on this, my brother.



I'm not qualified to say for certain if such a one would die "lost" or not. I'm no man's judge. God alone knows the thoughts and intentions of our hearts. Perhaps God will have a greater measure of grace for those who truly have never known about this being sin verses those who did indeed know and still clung to their justifications, exceptions, and excuses. But I think that more times than not, we as believers read these things... and we know. We often know and refuse to admit it to ourselves. We know or we wouldn't wrangle over it so much. We know, or we wouldn't crave the affirmation of our position on exceptions from others so badly. Of course, this doesn't speak for everyone. But I'm sure you see my flow of reasoning.

Many believe this position is very harsh. And for those who wish to justify sin... I'm sure it seems harsh.

Or maybe they simply don't agree with your interpretation. Not everyone who disagrees with you is trying to justify sin.


But where sin abounds, God's grace much more abounds. For those who surrender and realize that they need God's mercy and grace, they find an absolute certainty of forgiveness, and even blessing. God gives beauty for ashes, making their latter house more blessed than their former house.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by Originalist

You are correct. Not all who disagree with this interpretation is trying to justify sin. They simply have a different interpretation.

But let's return to what I actually wrote...

Many believe this position is very harsh. And for those who wish to justify sin... I'm sure it seems harsh.

You will note that I said that for those who do wish to justify sin, there is no doubt in my mind that this position will seem harsh.

[Antipas]

I believe that it is safe to say that God never willed for couples to divorce, let alone remarry another. And that being such, our interpretation of the issue should reflect this perfect will of God.

Can anything be said to contradict the above statement?

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by Antipas

I believe that it is safe to say that God never willed for couples to divorce, let alone remarry another. And that being such, our interpretation of the issue should reflect this perfect will of God.

Can anything be said to contradict the above statement?

Good afternoon, Antipas!

Your statement and question are very much like the exchanges I have with my buddy at church. I believe it boils down to how the topic is approached. If we are discussing best practices, I doubt you will get much argument. The real question is where is the line on what is actually permitted? Some might take that to mean we are just trying to see how much we can get away with and still be okay, but that isn't necessarily the case. If we attempt to heap perfection on the heads of remarried couples in hopes of getting them to repent, we better be quite sure they have something to repent over. So if the rule isn't as clear cut as it may seem, we should be very careful in its application so as not to turn others away from the Lord.

Not sure if that was the type of response you were looking for, but it's the first thing that came to mind.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by Ehud

Good afternoon, Antipas!

Your statement and question are very much like the exchanges I have with my buddy at church. I believe it boils down to how the topic is approached. If we are discussing best practices, I doubt you will get much argument. The real question is where is the line on what is actually permitted? Some might take that to mean we are just trying to see how much we can get away with and still be okay, but that isn't necessarily the case. If we attempt to heap perfection on the heads of remarried couples in hopes of getting them to repent, we better be quite sure they have something to repent over. So if the rule isn't as clear cut as it may seem, we should be very careful in its application so as not to turn others away from the Lord.

Not sure if that was the type of response you were looking for, but it's the first thing that came to mind.

I agree.

It definitely isn't the unpardonable sin. So I see no reason to heap unbearable condemnation on the heads of those who have already remarried another. However, I would present to any remarried couple that it wasn't God's perfect will that they remarry another, and encourage some confession and contrition on the issue. From there, it is between them and the Lord.

A more practical application of this would be for churches to not perform weddings involving divorcees.

Those divorcees who wish to remarry another should be handled with care and respect. However, the Scriptures should be upheld. The couple should be advised that God's will is that they reconcile with their spouse. If they cannot for whatever reason (some reasons genuinely are not within their control), and they still wish to marry another, they can be directed to the local courthouse.

Another practical application of this could be not to ordain divorcees. Paul's admonition that a bishop or deacon be the "husband of one wife" could be understood to disqualify one who has engaged in serial polygamy through divorce and remarriage. This one might be touchy too. Because some remarried divorcees might already be in leadership. Certainly a church should move slowly in this direction, allowing for grace and mercy to guide as they return to a position of honoring marriage as an indissoluble union.

[Antipas]

If marriage is an indissoluble bond that is terminated only upon death, the practice of divorce and remarriage currently embraced in American culture is "serial polygamy". The church does well to call attention to this sin and seek to lead the way into bringing confession, repentance, and guidance on the issue.

serial polygamy
1.The practice of marrying and divorcing a succession of individual spouses.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Antipas

If marriage is an indissoluble bond that is terminated only upon death, the practice of divorce and remarriage currently embraced in American culture is "serial polygamy". The church does well to call attention to this sin and seek to lead the way into bringing confession, repentance, and guidance on the issue.

serial polygamy
1.The practice of marrying and divorcing a succession of individual spouses.

It seems to me that your definition of serial polygamy is a more fitting definition of serial monogamy. If I have a relationship with one woman (in or out of the covenant of marriage) that is by definition a monogamous relationship. If I end that monogamous relationship and begin another monogamous relationship, and I do so several times (or a series of times) that would be by definition serial monogamy.

Monogamy is the practice of having one sexual partner (or one spouse) at a time.*


Serial polygamy would be if I married three wives, then divorced them all and married three more and repeated this a series of times. (series and serial, same base word).

The bottom line is that I believe your definition of serial polygamy is a misnomer.

*Definition from Merriam Webster

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

It seems to me that your definition of serial polygamy is a more fitting definition of serial monogamy. If I have a relationship with one woman (in or out of the covenant of marriage) that is by definition a monogamous relationship. If I end that monogamous relationship and begin another monogamous relationship, and I do so several times (or a series of times) that would be by definition serial monogamy.

Monogamy is the practice of having one sexual partner (or one spouse) at a time.*


Serial polygamy would be if I married three wives, then divorced them all and married three more and repeated this a series of times. (series and serial, same base word).

The bottom line is that I believe your definition of serial polygamy is a misnomer.

*Definition from Merriam Webster

Yes, what you're describing is indeed serial monogamy.

I'll explain what makes this circumstance "serial polygamy" instead of serial monogamy.

What would make divorce and remarriage to another "serial polygamy" is the belief in an indissoluble bond that can only be terminated upon death. It is this bond that causes a divorcee to commit adultery upon marrying another.

Luke 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.

If one establishes multiple indissoluble bonds with multiple women it is "serial polygamy" seeing that they are bound to their spouse for life, regardless of any sequential changes of earthly legal status.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Antipas

Yes, what you're describing is indeed serial monogamy.

I'll explain what makes this circumstance "serial polygamy" instead of serial monogamy.

What would make divorce and remarriage to another "serial polygamy" is the belief in an indissoluble bond that can only be terminated upon death. It is this bond that causes a divorcee to commit adultery upon marrying another.

Luke 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.

If one establishes multiple indissoluble bonds with multiple women it is "serial polygamy" seeing that they are bound to their spouse for life, regardless of any sequential changes of earthly legal status.

I’m not sure where you are getting your definition of polygamy. Let’s think about it. If I marry, and then divorce and re-marry, and my first marriage is (as you say) not dissolved, that would simply be polygamy. (I would have two wives). So where would the serial polygamy occur?

If a bishop is to be a husband of one wife; does that mean he has never divorced?

I don’t believe so, but I know many who believe that. Abraham had several wives as did many of the patriarchs of the Bible. I believe that Paul was talking about having only one wife as in not two or maybe seven hundred (Solomon). I don’t think he meant never having been married prior to this marriage. Maybe I’m wrong.

There seems to me to be some skewed definitions being applied here. I appreciate y’all exercising an abundance of caution in your theology, but words have meanings. We should apply the definitions correctly or we may wind up with the wrong answer.

Check the definition of fornication. It seems important because it is the exception that Jesus allowed.