A Mennonite view of divorce and remarriage

[temporal1]

there's much conflating of human law, human reasoning, and scriptures, without mutual recognition of when-where-how these leaps are being made.

on another note.
it's odd to imagine Jesus saying or suggesting we be faithful to "at least one marriage."
"pick one and stick with it?"

that sounds very human reasoning (to me.)

[Bootstrap]

If we don't give opportunity for our spouses to come back after unfaithfulness, will God measure the same out to us when we sin against Him?
I believe so, but that is just my take.

If this is what God wanted, I would expect a clear statement in Scripture, because it seems pretty important. I do not see such a command anywhere in the New Testament. There are a good handful of passages on divorce, none of them say that if your spouse leaves you then you need to be available to take them back at any time, even if they have married again, no matter what they have done.

That would be an easy thing for God to say in the New Testament if he wanted to.

[Bootstrap]

there's much conflating of human law, human reasoning, and scriptures, without mutual recognition of when-where-how these leaps are being made.

To me, it's more helpful to point out specifics, looking at the details of Scripture. This kind of global statement doesn't give much guidance, or help understand the text better.

Did you want to say something specific about one or more of these texts?

[Bootstrap]

I won't be responding further today. I may pick up on it again tomorrow, we'll see. I suspect we may be reaching the point of diminishing returns.

[MaxPC]

.. I personally know numerous women who there husbands have either abandoned them or divorced them and they remained faithful to their marriage and celibate.

So I wouldn't say marital faithfulness is impossible.

men do this, also.
our contemporary world actually makes this choice logistically much easier today than in history.
in earlier times, life was far more difficult, fewer options, esp for women, but also for men.

so, to reject faithfulness and celibacy today really does represent personal desire more than it did in prior times. i.e., our will, not caring so much about God's Will.

having said that, not all who remain alone and celibate today are doing so as a commitment to God's Will. today, i read, different folks/young people are choosing single life out of greed or fear or convenience.

this is not the same as intentional commitment to God-at-center.

Jesus spoke about the better way being to not marry, but to follow Him.
so, when a marriage seems to fail .. that door Jesus offered, can reopen!

"seems to fail," are important words.
as Wade was speaking to, above, things may appear hopeless (in all human reasoning) .. but this has nothing to do with allowing for God's Will and God's Time. this requires faith and obedience.

it's breath-taking how radically things can change - when it's God's Will to change them!

making broad statements like, "this will never happen," removes God's Will, the Holy Spirit, from the mix .. which is unwise. it's not even possible.

imho, humans should not have use of words like "never." we speak of which we know nothing.

lastly, i do not see CM's making demands on anyone to follow their beliefs, align with their church membership rules. this is important. it's choice.

it's a choice i would like to see made more available in the world.
no one has to be conservative Anabaptist to honor these views on marriage-divorce-remarriage.
Truth cannot be held captive! it's available to each one, through Jesus Christ.

i believe much misery could be avoided if these understandings were known from young, rather than only learned post-disaster. many do not learn, even then.

they just hurt and hurt, never grasping why.
the world tells them they are right, they are justified, but, they are puzzled when hurt remains.

Well said.
If I may add, there is also the example from CMs and CAs that true discipleship is indeed possible. All without caving to secular ideas to appease a small group of individuals who made mistakes; and who would rather cover up their mistakes and blame others instead of taking responsibility and learning from said mistakes.

CAs/CMs don't let the "tail wag the dog" with twisted Scriptural interpretations like those used by satan when Jesus was in the desert. For this reason, I feel all churches can learn from the CA/CM experience and wisdom.

[temporal1]

there's much conflating of human law, human reasoning, and scriptures, without mutual recognition of when-where-how these leaps are being made.

To me, it's more helpful to point out specifics, looking at the details of Scripture. This kind of global statement doesn't give much guidance, or help understand the text better.

Did you want to say something specific about one or more of these texts?

(i believe) it's the way you jump from present human law and human reasoning, then to citing scriptures, that makes this discourse confusing. i am trying to understand, as others are, these leaps confuse.

[lesterb]

If the CAs want to convince the world of their position, they need to stop trying to build their case from a strictly exegetical standpoint, and rather make their case from a simple reading of scripture, coupled with a historical narrative of what it takes to build societies who intend to demonstrate what it would look like if everybody obeyed the King.

I think this is what I was trying to do in the OP. I gave the commonly used passages as a basis for what I believe. The simple reading of these together does not allow for remarriage, in my opinion.

I also noted an explanation of the exception clause that was given by Edershiem, an acknowledged Jewish Christian scholar who did an immense amount of study on Jewish culture and world view. I don’t necessarily push this, but it is accepted by a lot conservative Anabaptists.

I also noted that the view I was giving in the OP is also partly utilitarian. I think a brotherhood of believers has the authority to say that we want to be on the safe side of a possible misunderstanding. I think God honors such intentions. But we should also note that even this is an attempt to abide by the simple reading of scripture.

Appleman enlarged on this point by looking at current history of the results when we deviate from this.

The following quote comes from this thread.

But it certainly is ironic when people suggest that you can't be an Anabaptist or a Mennonite if you believe what the original Anabaptists and Mennonites taught.

I don't know of anyone who believes this. Do you know of some?

I think I've seen some of that here on MD - ironically, it's not usually the Anabaptists and Mennonites.

We are all the product of our world view, culture, and background. I don’t think I’ve ever condemned the early Anabaptists for their beliefs, though I don’t feel comfortable with all the positions they took on some of these subjects. They were responding in all good faith to what they faced in their time. Conservative Anabaptists of today do the same, I believe.

I won't be responding further today. I may pick up on it again tomorrow, we'll see. I suspect we may be reaching the point of diminishing returns.

I was thinking the same. My purpose in posting the OP was to try to put in place some sort of a definitive statement of my personal position. It is easy to be misunderstood when your opinions are scattered throughout 14 pages of discussion.

I think my purpose has been accomplished. And I think we have had adequate discussion to give others the opportunity to express their opinions in response to my post. I’m about ready to shut this down. Boot is of course welcome to do what I did – put together a definitive explanation of his views and start another thread. I think that would be more helpful than continuing this one.

I don’t want to squelch good discussion but almost always these threads reach a point where they are no longer productive. Josh, you gave several very good suggestions for practical threads discussing some of the repercussions from what we were discussing. I’d like to see you go ahead and start those.

[temporal1]

My purpose in posting the OP was to try to put in place some sort of a definitive statement of my personal position.

i think this is what most wanted to find in this thread.
fortunately, many contributed encouraging, helpful insights on this topic -
which are so very difficult to find in the world!

so, this thread is a treasure to remember.
one of the better ones on this topic (from what i recall.)

i have no opinion on closing it.
that's up to you and admin.

[MaxPC]

Lester, for myself I am glad you brought forth this subject. This has been quite instructive and helpful

[Bootstrap]

I was thinking the same. My purpose in posting the OP was to try to put in place some sort of a definitive statement of my personal position. It is easy to be misunderstood when your opinions are scattered throughout 14 pages of discussion.

I think my purpose has been accomplished.

I think you did that well. Ernie might consider starting a thread of his own on this too, I think he has a different take that comes to similar practical conclusions.

Boot is of course welcome to do what I did – put together a definitive explanation of his views and start another thread. I think that would be more helpful than continuing this one.

I may do that, probably not before January. I'm more likely to do that if at least a few people indicate that they would be interested.

I don’t want to squelch good discussion but almost always these threads reach a point where they are no longer productive.

Agreed.