Question about 1 Cor. 7:11

[Gary Hicks]

Hello all. I had a question about the way 1 Cor. 7:11 is worded. It first commands a woman to not depart from her husband, but then it says 'But and If she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband."

The issue here is that it seems God is giving her two legitimate choices. She can 1) remain unmarried OR 2) be reconciled to her husband.

This appears to me that God is saying he is ok with her leaving her husband as long as she remains unmarried, and that she can either choose to be reconciled with her husband or not.

The ramifications of this scenario seems to imply she can legitimately leave her husband without grounds, while the husband is left without a wife if she chooses to not be reconciled.

What is missing here? It does not say she is to 'remain unmarried AND be reconciled, but rather it says she is to remain unmarried OR be reconciled to her husband.'

This sounds like either choice she makes is ok with God, but if she chooses to not be reconciled it seems the husband has to suffer for her wrong doing with no recourse.

Thoughts?

 

[Episkopos]

Hello all. I had a question about the way 1 Cor. 7:11 is worded. It first commands a woman to not depart from her husband, but then it says 'But and If she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband."

The issue here is that it seems God is giving her two legitimate choices. She can 1) remain unmarried OR 2) be reconciled to her husband.

This appears to me that God is saying he is ok with her leaving her husband as long as she remains unmarried, and that she can either choose to be reconciled with her husband or not.

The ramifications of this scenario seems to imply she can legitimately leave her husband without grounds, while the husband is left without a wife if she chooses to not be reconciled.

What is missing here? It does not say she is to 'remain unmarried AND be reconciled, but rather it says she is to remain unmarried OR be reconciled to her husband.'

This sounds like either choice she makes is ok with God, but if she chooses to not be reconciled it seems the husband has to suffer for her wrong doing with no recourse.

Thoughts?

Welcome here! The woman choosing to leave her husband gives her the power she needs to avoid brutality and unfair treatment from her husband. A woman is nor permitted to choose another husband. She is married to her husband as long as he lives.

If a women forsakes her husband and marries another man...then the man is free to marry again. The guilt of the divorce is on the woman. If a man divorces his wife for no good reason (such as infidelity)....and he marries another woman....then the guilt is on his own head for what the jilted wife might do.

 

[101G]

Hello all. I had a question about the way 1 Cor. 7:11 is worded. It first commands a woman to not depart from her husband, but then it says 'But and If she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband."

The issue here is that it seems God is giving her two legitimate choices. She can 1) remain unmarried OR 2) be reconciled to her husband.

This appears to me that God is saying he is ok with her leaving her husband as long as she remains unmarried, and that she can either choose to be reconciled with her husband or not.

The ramifications of this scenario seems to imply she can legitimately leave her husband without grounds, while the husband is left without a wife if she chooses to not be reconciled.

What is missing here? It does not say she is to 'remain unmarried AND be reconciled, but rather it says she is to remain unmarried OR be reconciled to her husband.'

This sounds like either choice she makes is ok with God, but if she chooses to not be reconciled it seems the husband has to suffer for her wrong doing with no recourse.

Thoughts?

This is a good question, and many don't understand what is happening. but lets try to shed some light on the issue. 1 Corinthians 7:11 "But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife".
let her remain unmarried is in reference to applying for divorce. for this is answered in Genesis 21:14 "And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba".
she departed, but in 1 Corinthians 7:11 it said "let not the wife depart". Abraham before the law of divorce knew the only way for him to be free of his wife hagar is if she was "DEAD". well thank God for the the Law of "Divorce", which works both ways. one don't have to A. waite for his wife, or husband to die, nor B, neither kill or murder one another... (smile). but each can have "LIFE". hence the divorce.


to remain unmarried is to apply and recieve the "Divorce".
Holped that helped.

PICJAG.

 

[Gary Hicks]

Welcome here! The woman choosing to leave her husband gives her the power she needs to avoid brutality and unfair treatment from her husband. A woman is nor permitted to choose another husband. She is married to her husband as long as he lives.

If a women forsakes her husband and marries another man...then the man is free to marry again. The guilt of the divorce is on the woman. If a man divorces his wife for no good reason (such as infidelity)....and he marries another woman....then the guilt is on his own head for what the jilted wife might do.

Hello - What you said was the woman choosing to leave her husband gives her the power she needs to avoid brutality and so forth from her husband. But the issue was not that she had the power to choose to leave her husband...she was commanded NOT to leave...she actually broke the commandment of God in leaving...

The issue here also seems to be pointing exclusively towards getting a divorce and not just leaving her husband. The reason I say this, is because of the wording of Paul. He first says she is not to depart, but then says if she does depart she is to 'remain unmarried.' It seems people read 'remain unmarried' and think it just means she is not to marry someone else. But had Paul really just been addressing her just leaving her husband, but not getting a divorce, he would not have said for her to 'remain unmarried.' To 'remain unmarried' means she somehow came into the state of being unmarried whereas he was originally speaking to married believers. So how would it be that she became unmarried just by physically leaving? The answer is she 'became unmarried,' only in the legal sense of filing for divorce when the divorce was not actually legitimate in the sight of God seeing there was no adultery or fornication involved.

The reason I say she would be filing faulty divorce papers is that God would not have commanded her to not leave her husband had there actually been adultery involved, because we know God does permit divorce in these cases. So Paul is saying she is to remain unmarried only in the sight of the law, but then when he says she could choose to be reconciled to her husband, he is harking back to the reality that in the sight of God she is still married and he is still her husband.

But this only brings us a bit further in understanding but does not answer the bigger question of why it would be that God would seemingly allow her to live apart from her husband, leaving her husband with no recourse as long as she refused to be reconciled to him. I just don't see how to avoid that God seems to be good with either of these options. It would seem if she broke the commandment of God by divorcing him without cause, then he would REQUIRE her to be reconciled, rather than giving her an option if she wants to or not. This seems to me like saying 'You should not commit adultery, but if you want to its ok.'

Remember it says she can either remain unmarried OR be reconciled...it does not say she should remain unmarried AND be reconciled. These are two distinct choices it seems she can make and God is ok with either of them. It seems to me there is some huge misunderstanding somewhere or there is a translation issue or something as this just does not seem that God would allow her to continue to break his word with no repentance required.

 

[Gary Hicks]

This is a good question, and many don't understand what is happening. but lets try to shed some light on the issue. 1 Corinthians 7:11 "But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife".
let her remain unmarried is in reference to applying for divorce. for this is answered in Genesis 21:14 "And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba".
she departed, but in 1 Corinthians 7:11 it said "let not the wife depart". Abraham before the law of divorce knew the only way for him to be free of his wife hagar is if she was "DEAD". well thank God for the the Law of "Divorce", which works both ways. one don't have to A. waite for his wife, or husband to die, nor B, neither kill or murder one another... (smile). but each can have "LIFE". hence the divorce.


to remain unmarried is to apply and recieve the "Divorce".
Holped that helped.

PICJAG.

I am not sure I understand exactly what you are saying. You are saying Abraham knew the only way he could be free from Hagar was for her to be dead, but rather than wait for her to die you say he sent her away and she departed which would mean he divorced her before she died.

So what do you think about the choices God gave the woman who divorced her husband without cause? Does it seem right to you that she could do this and not be required to make it right with her husband? How can God give permission to this woman to essentially forsake her husband, leaving him with no wife, and no recourse if she chooses to not reconcile with him?

 

[101G]

I am not sure I understand exactly what you are saying. You are saying Abraham knew the only way he could be free from Hagar was for her to be dead, but rather than wait for her to die you say he sent her away and she departed which would mean he divorced her before she died.

no, God sent her right back to Abraham. what man put out... away, God put right back in.
understand something, there is more to a divorce than meet the eye so to speak. men and women, husband and wives could divorce under the Law. what was happening men who control the money abused the law. they was putting away their wives with out any consequences. they would put one away, for any reason, and get another. well God put an end to that, with the written bill of Divorcement. when the wife or husband leaves now, they leave with substance to live, or start over. as in Abraham case who was filthy rich sent his wife Hagar, and his son, out with just a loaf of bread and a, a, a, bottle of water, see what's wrong with that picture. well she didn't die, because God intervene, read the story.

So what do you think about the choices God gave the woman who divorced her husband without cause? Does it seem right to you that she could do this and not be required to make it right with her husband? How can God give permission to this woman to essentially forsake her husband, leaving him with no wife, and no recourse if she chooses to not reconcile with him?

women was just as men, only without the riches, or substance. but God is no respector of person. women divorced their husband, supportive scripture, Mark 10:12 "And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery".

understand the difference between "Put Away" vs a written bill of divorcement.

just as with a marriage. Espousal, or engage in Marriage vs a Consummated, or bonded in Marriage.

understand how each works.

A.“The Marriage”
Stage #1. Espousal, or engage in Marriage. One is married, not yet Consummated, (or no sexual union yet).
Stage #2. Consummated, or bonded in Marriage. Here, fully married,(sexual union) .

B.“The Divorcement”
Stage #1. The Putting Away, the Espousal bond broken, Only for Fornication. (Departing, or separation).
Stage #2. The Bill of Divorcement. Here fully divorced. (excluding Fornication).

so in 1 Corinthians 7:11 notice the KEYWORD, "Put Away". "But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

so if she departs and do not apply for a written bill of divorcement, she cannot marry another. so yes she have to remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. but if she applies for the written bill of divorcement, until it's approve she cannot marry before it is final, because she is still married. see it now?. one must have the the written bill of divorcement in "HAND" first. scripture, Deuteronomy 24:1 "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". see it now, she departs when the written bill is given in her hand, meaning it have been approved.

Hope this helps

PICJAG.

 

[Gary Hicks]

"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". see it now, she departs when the written bill is given in her hand, meaning it have been approved.

Yes, that was the way it was in the old testament. In the New Testament the only valid reason to put away your wife is for fornication....not just 'some uncleanness,' he found in her. This is why the Pharisees were asking Jesus if it was lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause, and he said no, just for fornication, but according to the Old Testament law, which you just quoted the man could put her away for any uncleanness he found in her. So the law was changed in the New Testament but anyway 1 Cor. 7:11 is not talking about the husband sending her away, or divorcing her, it is talking about the wife departing from him when she was commanded not to do so by God..and it was not a legitimate divorce she was initiating or God would not have told her not to do it, so it would not have been valid no matter if was the husband or the wife that had drawn up divorce papers because there was no fornication involved....

 

[101G]

"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". see it now, she departs when the written bill is given in her hand, meaning it have been approved.

Yes, that was the way it was in the old testament. In the New Testament the only valid reason to put away your wife is for fornication....not just 'some uncleanness,' he found in her. This is why the Pharisees were asking Jesus if it was lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause, and he said no, just for fornication, but according to the Old Testament law, which you just quoted the man could put her away for any uncleanness he found in her. So the law was changed in the New Testament but anyway 1 Cor. 7:11 is not talking about the husband sending her away, or divorcing her, it is talking about the wife departing from him when she was commanded not to do so by God..and it was not a legitimate divorce she was initiating or God would not have told her not to do it, so it would not have been valid no matter if was the husband or the wife that had drawn up divorce papers because there was no fornication involved....

First thanks for the reply. second in fornication there is no need for a writting of a bill of divorcement, but to put her or him away. for fornication only exist in an Espousal, or engagement Marriage,as was with Joseph & Mary. adultery in a Consummated, or bonded Marriage. understand the difference. as said, "if she depart". understand, she or he can separate from her husband, or his wife, but cannot be marriage again while separated. now if the unbelieving depart, what then? answer, 1 Corinthians 7:15 "But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace". ok what's the difference between a believer and a none believer? ... physically.... nothing. spiritually sanctification. but as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.

PICJAG

 

[Gary Hicks]

Luke 16:18 says "whoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another commits adultery.." The man in this setting is a person who was married to a wife, not a woman he was planning on marrying someday, but a woman he had already married. The paperwork is mainly just for legal reasons as it is known you can get a divorce for a number of different reasons even if there was no adultery involved. The issue is not the paperwork, it is whether in fact one of the parties had been unfaithful or not.

My question is about the two options given by Paul to the woman who disobeys the commandment of God and divorces her husband without cause. Why was she was given the option to be reconciled to her husband or not? How did her disobedience place her in position that she could choose to be subject to her husband or not? Are not all believing wives to be obedient to their husbands? Did God tell them this was an option or did he not say explicitly: But I would have you to KNOW, the head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman is the man. Did he not say in 1 Peter 3:1 "Likewise ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands....." And did he not say in Ephesians 5:22 "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as unto the Lord...Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their husbands in everything."

Does the church have the option to be subject to Christ or not? Of course not. Is not Christ the head of the church? Is not the man the head of the woman? Is the woman to be subject to her husband or not? How is it this disobedient woman gets to 'choose' whether she will reconcile with her husband or not? He is suffering because of her disobedience, yet seemingly God has told her she can reconcile with him if she wants to, or she can just live apart from him forever.