What does Jesus say about divorce?

I heard that divorce in Christianity is not allowed, is that true? If so, where and why does Jesus say that?

Google doesn't exist where you are? Different sects of Christianity do allow divorce. But if you want some Scripture....

In Luke 16:18

Jesus says: Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.

Mark 10:2-12:

2 And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 3 He answered them, "What did Moses command you?" 4 They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away." 5 But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.' 7 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder." 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

Divorce in and of itself isn't exactly the problem...it's remarriage.

Only reason for divorce is for unfaithfullness I believe. Pretty sure there was some story about this dude who had a wife who cheated on him a lot and he forgave her every time. I think that's what he wants you to do but realizes most people couldn't do that.

Only reason for divorce is for unfaithfullness I believe. Pretty sure there was some story about this dude who had a wife who cheated on him a lot and he forgave her every time. I think that's what he wants you to do but realizes most people couldn't do that.

cain006

[QUOTE="cain006"]

Only reason for divorce is for unfaithfullness I believe. Pretty sure there was some story about this dude who had a wife who cheated on him a lot and he forgave her every time. I think that's what he wants you to do but realizes most people couldn't do that.

GazaAli

You mean like the same "turn to them the other cheek" teaching of Jesus?GazaAli

"Turn the other cheek" doesn't mean what most people think it does. I'll just copy-pasta from Wiki to save time:

A literal interpretation of the passages, in which the command refers specifically to a manual strike against the side of a person's face, can be supported by reference to historical and other factors. At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality.

You can separate from your spouse but man cannot dissolve marriage. Meaning once you get married you are married until the death of one of your spouses and cannot remarry until that time. Moses allowed members of the Jewish community to remarry but the marriage Christ proposed is permanent under penalty of adultery. ferrari2001

[QUOTE="GazaAli"] You mean like the same "turn to them the other cheek" teaching of Jesus?br0kenrabbit

"Turn the other cheek" doesn't mean what most people think it does. I'll just copy-pasta from Wiki to save time:

A literal interpretation of the passages, in which the command refers specifically to a manual strike against the side of a person's face, can be supported by reference to historical and other factors. At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality.

@XilePrincess if what you're saying is true, that the Bible contained so much condemn for divorce, isn't it odd that divorce is widely accepted among Christians or that they're just apathetic about it?GazaAli

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]@XilePrincess if what you're saying is true, that the Bible contained so much condemn for divorce, isn't it odd that divorce is widely accepted among Christians or that they're just apathetic about it?XilePrincess

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]You can separate from your spouse but man cannot dissolve marriage. Meaning once you get married you are married until the death of one of your spouses and cannot remarry until that time. Moses allowed members of the Jewish community to remarry but the marriage Christ proposed is permanent under penalty of adultery. GazaAli

Divorce is fine if you're Protestant, but not if you're Catholic.

Maybe the entire Scripture would help.... You have heard that it was said, Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.LJS9502_basic

I'll continue the Wiki pasta where I left off:

By handing over one's cloak in addition to one's tunic, the debtor has essentially given the shirt off his back, a situation directly forbidden by Hebrew Law as stated in Deuteronomy:

10 ¶ When thou dost lend thy brother any thing, thou shalt not go into his house to fetch his pledge.

11 Thou shalt stand abroad, and the man to whom thou dost lend shall bring out the pledge abroad unto thee.
12 And if the man be poor, thou shalt not sleep with his pledge:

13 In any case thou shalt deliver him the pledge again when the sun goeth down, that he may sleep in his own raiment, and bless thee: and it shall be righteousness unto thee before the LORD thy God.Deuteronomy 24:1013 KJV

By giving the lender the cloak as well the debtor was reduced to nakedness. Public nudity was viewed as bringing shame on the viewer, not just the naked, as seen in Noah's case:

20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their fathers nakedness.Genesis 9:2023 KJV

The succeeding verse from the Sermon on the Mount can similarly be seen as a method for making the oppressor break the law. The commonly invoked Roman law of Angaria allowed the Roman authorities to demand that inhabitants of occupied territories carry messages and equipment the distance of one mile post, but prohibited forcing an individual to go further than a single mile, at the risk of suffering disciplinary actions.[5] In this example, the nonviolent interpretation sees Jesus as placing criticism on an unjust and hated Roman law as well as clarifying the teaching to extend beyond Jewish law.[6]

I'll continue the Wiki pasta where I left off:br0kenrabbit

Yeah I saw that Wiki page.  I also saw where they had three different interpretations....so it's a bit disengenuous to say it's what they promote it to mean.

I think sodomy is talked about pretty badly in the old testament. I know that Christians follow the new testament but they are still influenced by it and some still follow it to a certain extent. It could be where the strong opposition to homosexuality stems from. Correct me if I'm wrong though.GazaAli

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

I'll continue the Wiki pasta where I left off:LJS9502_basic

Yeah I saw that Wiki page.  I also saw where they had three different interpretations....so it's a bit disengenuous to say it's what they promote it to mean.

It is listed at the 'literalinterpretation'. And I didn't first come across such interpretation on Wiki, but rather many years ago in various works that put Jesus forth as an activist as much as a messiah.

I just don't feel like typing up a massive post, so as I said in my entry to this thread, in an effort to save time I'll simply copy-pasta.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

I'll continue the Wiki pasta where I left off:br0kenrabbit

Yeah I saw that Wiki page.  I also saw where they had three different interpretations....so it's a bit disengenuous to say it's what they promote it to mean.

It is listed at the 'literalinterpretation'. And I didn't first come across such interpretation on Wiki, but rather many years ago in various works that put Jesus forth as an activist as much as a messiah.

I just don't feel like typing up a massive post, so as I said in my entry to this thread, in an effort to save time I'll simply copy-pasta.

That still makes it's one opinion. And I'm not fond of scripture mining. Just wanted to clarify is all. Salut!LJS9502_basic

That The Bible is truth is also opinion.

That's why I prefer the sciences, but religion is at least interesting.

I can careless what "Jesus" has to say about anything. Ravenous_Joker

well then you should probably stop caring so much about it

Jesus and the Judeo-Christian tradition put heavy emphasis on couples staying together. As verses were mentioned earlier, Jesus' teaching does away with the whole notion of "once I don't feel 'in love' with this person, I'm done with them" that is plaguing our own culture. It may seem harsh, but I think it is overall a very good thing.

Jesus and the Judeo-Christian tradition put heavy emphasis on couples staying together. As verses were mentioned earlier, Jesus' teaching does away with the whole notion of "once I don't feel 'in love' with this person, I'm done with them" that is plaguing our own culture. It may seem harsh, but I think it is overall a very good thing.

battlefront23

you think it's good to require two people who are not in love to stay married?

[QUOTE="battlefront23"]

Jesus and the Judeo-Christian tradition put heavy emphasis on couples staying together. As verses were mentioned earlier, Jesus' teaching does away with the whole notion of "once I don't feel 'in love' with this person, I'm done with them" that is plaguing our own culture. It may seem harsh, but I think it is overall a very good thing.

lostrib

you think it's good to require two people who are not in love to stay married?

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="battlefront23"]

Jesus and the Judeo-Christian tradition put heavy emphasis on couples staying together. As verses were mentioned earlier, Jesus' teaching does away with the whole notion of "once I don't feel 'in love' with this person, I'm done with them" that is plaguing our own culture. It may seem harsh, but I think it is overall a very good thing.

battlefront23

you think it's good to require two people who are not in love to stay married?

Wait I thought it was til death do you part? or does that only apply in the specific instances you are okay with?

Wait I thought it was til death do you part? or does that only apply in the specific instances you are okay with?

lostrib

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

Wait I thought it was til death do you part? or does that only apply in the specific instances you are okay with?

battlefront23

Nope, don't see anything about not beating the hell out of your spouse in the wedding vows, guess they have to stick together until someone gets beat to death

i don't know about that but i do know when he gives you a ride someplace he says, "put the meat on the seat or let the feet hit the street!" 

Nope, don't see anything about not beating the hell out of your spouse in the wedding vows, guess they have to stick together until someone gets beat to death

lostrib

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

Nope, don't see anything about not beating the hell out of your spouse in the wedding vows, guess they have to stick together until someone gets beat to death

battlefront23

why should they stay together if they don't love each other?  

why should they stay together if they don't love each other?  

lostrib

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

why should they stay together if they don't love each other?  

battlefront23

because they apparently loved each other at one time, or tax reasons, or perhaps she got pregnant, or for a green card, or they were drunk in Vegas

because they apparently loved each other at one time, or tax reasons, or perhaps she got pregnant, or for a green cardlostrib

[QUOTE="lostrib"]because they apparently loved each other at one time, or tax reasons, or perhaps she got pregnant, or for a green cardbattlefront23

They would get divorced so that they are no longer married to a person they don't love or even possibly hate

They would get divorced so that they are no longer married to a person they don't love or even possibly hate

lostrib

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

They would get divorced so that they are no longer married to a person they don't love or even possibly hate

battlefront23

What if they have?  What does it matter?  They no longer want to be married to each other, they shouldn't be forced to stay together

What if they have?  What does it matter?  They no longer want to be married to each other, they shouldn't be forced to stay together

lostrib

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

What if they have?  What does it matter?  They no longer want to be married to each other, they shouldn't be forced to stay together

battlefront23

um no you've stated that you agree with the Christian ideas against marriage, as well as that they should stick to their vows including "til death do us part" and that marriages shouldn't be ended just because people aren't in love anymore.  And you've yet to give a good reason why two people who are no longer in love shouldn't get divorced

um no you've stated that you agree with the Christian ideas against marriage, as well as that they should stick to their vows including "til death do us part" and that marriages shouldn't be ended just because people aren't in love anymore.  And you've yet to give a good reason why two people who are no longer in love shouldn't get divorcedlostrib

Biblical marriage is well explained here.

[QUOTE="lostrib"]um no you've stated that you agree with the Christian ideas against marriage, as well as that they should stick to their vows including "til death do us part" and that marriages shouldn't be ended just because people aren't in love anymore.  And you've yet to give a good reason why two people who are no longer in love shouldn't get divorcedbattlefront23

You know what else is bad for children, having two parents who hate each other and argue all the time.  That doesn't exactly teach them anything great about love

So if two people don't love each other, or don't even like each other, why should they stay married?

You know what else is bad for children, having two parents who hate each other and argue all the time.  That doesn't exactly teach them anything great about love

So if two people don't love each other, or don't even like each other, why should they stay married?

lostrib