Is Divorse a mortal sin?

[dockeryfan]

All sins are mortal sins, none are worse than the other in God's eyes.

lol

So is this in the religion of keestman? Because there are plenty of religions that have "categorized" sin.

Catholic is the only one that uses the terms mortal sin and venial sin, I believe.

[polywog999]

lol

So is this in the religion of keestman? Because there are plenty of religions that have "categorized" sin.

Catholic is the only one that uses the terms mortal sin and venial sin, I believe.

In my religion, sin is a case by case merit. There are no afterlife punishments though.

[mardi gras skin]

lol

So is this in the religion of keestman?

She is expressing a common view of sin within Christianity.

[polywog999]

Originally Posted by Zguy28

To an unbeliever it will be just another sin that is given as evidence at the Judgment. I have trouble believing that a believer in Jesus, who has been regenerated to salvation, by the grace of God and the Holy Spirit could even commit such an act of deliberate and willful rebellion against their savior!

People sin all the time, Christian or not, and on purpose.

My understanding is that there are no crimes against god beyond forgiveness.

As long as you are truly pensive.

[polywog999]

Originally Posted by Zguy28

To an unbeliever it will be just another sin that is given as evidence at the Judgment. I have trouble believing that a believer in Jesus, who has been regenerated to salvation, by the grace of God and the Holy Spirit could even commit such an act of deliberate and willful rebellion against their savior!

People sin all the time, Christian or not, and on purpose.

My understanding is that there are no crimes against god beyond forgiveness.

As long as you are truly pensive.

Originally Posted by keeastman

All sins are mortal sins, none are worse than the other in God's eyes.

I was taught this as a baptist.

[CrabR]

My understanding is that there are no crimes against god beyond forgiveness.As long as you are truly pensive.

Matthew 12:31

And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

Moreover, the thrust of this thread is that Christians are hypocrites

they are

they try to rationalize everything they do not like in the bible

They try to turn the vengeful hateful murderous God in the OT to a Loving God that casts you into Hell[but he loves you] to be tortured forever and ever in the NT

as for divorce in the NT Jesus made it very clear

Matthew 5:32

but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 19:6

"So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."

Mark 10:11

And He said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her;

Luke 16:18 (

Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.

Paul says my children are unclean so I guess we can divorce

1 Corinthinians 7:14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.

15Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.

[twa]

People sin all the time, Christian or not, and on purpose.

My understanding is that there are no crimes against god beyond forgiveness.

As long as you are truly pensive.

That would depend on how you define forgiveness

There are no sins that Jesus's sacrifice will not cover(aside from rejection of that sacrifice imo)

However I do not believe you are shielded/immunized from the results of your sins in anyway other than that.

Knowingly going against God's will and sin that effects others carry a higher price so to speak

I don't believe repentance,nor God's forgiveness ,removes the consequences of our sins in any way other than salvation

My favorite example of that is David(a man after God's own heart) who sinned greatly and was forgiven...yet both he(and his family) and the nation he was head of suffered the repercussions from his sin.

to me it is a eternal salvation card,not a get out of jail card;)

[Burgold]

That would depend on how you define forgiveness

There are no sins that Jesus's sacrifice will not cover(aside from rejection of that sacrifice imo)

However I do not believe you are shielded/immunized from the results of your sins in anyway other than that.

Knowingly going against God's will and sin that effects others carry a higher price so to speak

I don't believe repentance,nor God's forgiveness ,removes the consequences of our sins in any way other than salvation

My favorite example of that is David(a man after God's own heart) who sinned greatly and was forgiven...yet both he(and his family) and the nation he was head of suffered the repercussions from his sin.

to me it is a eternal salvation card,not a get out of jail card;)

I've always hoped/suspected/preferred to believe that the Christian salvation if tied to Jesus is also tied to actions. Afterall, it is one thing to say, "I believe" and another thing to act that one. Would a "godly" man who knows Jesus be a mass murderer... being a mass murderer would be a rejection of Jesus whether or not there is a belief that he was the reborn messiah. So, if I'm right, even in Christianity sins do count, intent does count, it does come down to proving your belief in Jesus by the life you choose to live.

Maybe that's just my way of understanding the Jesus loophole around sin and evil deeds though.

[mardi gras skin]

Ok, here's what I consider to be the most helpful commentary on what Jesus had to say about divorce. Its by Dallas Willard and it comes from the book, the Divine Conspiracy. Its a long quote but the subject deserves to be handled fairly. For any Christian who has gone through a divorce, I think this might offer a healthy insight into what Jesus had to say about the topic (Matthew chapters 5 and 19). I typed it in so I'm sure there are a few scribal errors.

One of the most important things in the male mind of Jesus’ day, and perhaps every day, was to be able to get rid of a woman who did not please him. And on this point the man really had great discretion, whereas from the woman’s point of view divorce was simply brutal and, practically speaking, could not be chosen. When Jesus gave his teaching that divorce as then practiced was unacceptable, the men who were his closest students responded by saying, “If that is how things are, its better not to marry at all!” (Matthew 19:10)

A man was generally thought to be righteous or good in the matter of divorce if, when he sent his wife away, he gave her a written statement that declared her to be divorced. She at least had, then, a certificate to prove her status as unmarried. This allowed her to defend herself against a charge of adultery if found with a man, for such a charge could result in her death. It also made it possible for her to seek marriage to another, or if all else failed, to make her living as a prostitute.

Certainly there was long-standing disagreement among the interpreters of the law as to whether the man was free to divorce his wife “for every reason whatsoever” (Matt. 19:3), or only for adultery. The Pharisees dragged Jesus into this controversy, and he clearly took the highly restrictive position of the school of Shammai, which allowed divorce only on “moral” grounds. The school of Hillel, by contrast, permitted it “for every reason.” For example, if the wife burned the food for merely over salted it. Rabbi Akibah even allowed divorce if the husband merely saw a woman whose appearance pleased him better and he wanted her as wife instead of a wife he had.

In practice, however, a woman knew very well that she could be divorced for any reason her husband chose. The law as practiced was entirely favorable to the husband’s slightest whim, even though the Mosiac codes, chiefly found in Deuteronomy 22-24, are obviously much more restrictive and require some sort of sexual impropriety in the woman. They also specify conditions under which a man entirely loses the right to divorce a woman.

When Jesus himself comes to deal with the righteousness of persons in divorce, he does not forbid divorce absolutely, but he makes it very clear that divorce was never God’s intent for men and woman in a marriage. The intent in marriage is a union two people that is even deeper than the union of parents and children or any other human relationship. They are to become “one flesh”, one natural unit, building one life, which therefore could never lose or substitute for one member and remain a whole life (Matt. 19:5; Gen. 2:24).

The Principle of Hardness of Heart

Yet he does not say that divorce is never permissible. To begin with, he accepts the Mosiac exception of “uncleanness,” which may have covered a number of things but chiefly referred to adultery (Matt. 5:32; 19:8-9). His interpretation of the grounds of the Mosaic exception is not, however, simply that adultery and the like are intrinsically so horrible that a marriage relationship cannot survive them. That, of course, is really not true. Many marriages have survived them.

Rather, it is the hardness of the human heart that Jesus cites as grounds for permitting divorce in case of adultery. In other words, the ultimate grounds for divorce is human meanness. If it weren’t for that, even adultery would not legitimize divorce. No doubt what was foremost in his mind was the fact that the a woman could quite well wind up dead, or brutally abused, if the man could not dump her. It is still so today, of course. Such is “our hardness of heart.” Better, then, that a divorce occur than life be made unbearable. Jesus does nothing to retract this principle.

But though not absolutely ruling out divorce, he makes very incisive comments about what divorce does to people. First of all, he insists, as already noted, that divorce was never God’s intention for men and women in marriage. Divorce disrupts a natural unit in a way that harms its member for life, no matter how much worse it would have been for them to stay together. Marriage means that “they are no longer two, but one flesh” (Mark 10:8). This is an arrangement in nature that God has established, and no human act can change that order.

Perhaps one of the hardest things for the contemporary mind to accept is that life runs in natural cycles that cannot be disrupted without indelible damage to the individuals involved. Divorce powerfully disrupts one of the major natural cycles of human existence. And the individuals involved can never be the same--whether or not a divorce was, everything considered, justifiable. But of course a brutal marriage is not a good thing either, and we must resist any attempt to classify divorce as a special, irredeemable form of wickedness. It is not. It is sometimes the right thing to do, everything considered.

Second--and this is the main point of the teaching in Matthew 5:31-32--just the fact that a man (or a woman) has given the woman (or man) a “pink slip” and “done everything legally” does not mean that he or she has done right or has been a good person with regard to the relationship. This is what Jesus is denying with his teaching, for that is what the old teaching, affirmed.

Forced into “Adultery”

Third, he very clearly gives his reasons for rejecting the old view of rightness in divorce by saying that anyone who sends away his wife on grounds other than “uncleanness” forces her into adultery, and whoever takes as wife a woman who has been sent away from another engages in adultery (Matt. 5:32; 19:9). This is not to forbid divorce, but it is to make clear what its effects are. What, exactly do these statements mean?

In the Jewish society of Jesus’ day, as for most times and places in human history, the consequences of divorce were devastating for the woman. Except for some highly unlikely circumstances, her life was, simply, ruined. No harm was done to the man, by contrast, except from time to time a small financial loss and perhaps bitter relationships with the ex-wife’s family members.

For the woman, however, there were only three realistic possibilities in Jesus’ day. She might find a place in the home of generous relative, but usually on grudging terms and as little more than a servant. She might find a man who would marry her, but always as “damaged goods” and sustained in a degraded relationship. Or she might, finally, make a place in the community as a prostitute. Society simply would not then, as our does today, support a divorced woman to any degree or allow her to support herself in a decent fashion.

These circumstances explain why Jesus says that to divorce a woman causes her to commit adultery and to marry a divorced woman is to commit adultery (Matt. 5:32; 19:9). To not marry again was a terrible prospect for the woman. It meant, in nearly every case, to grow old with no children as well as with no social position, a perpetual failure to forget it. As in the phrase “adultery in the heart,” Jesus speaks of being forced into “adultery” to point out the degraded sexual condition that was, then if not now, sure to be the result of divorce.

Is It Then Better Not to Marry?

As noted already, when his apprentices heard what Jesus said about divorce, they immediately concluded that it was better not to marry at all than to be unable to get rid of a woman easily (Matt. 19:10). But Jesus, like Paul later (1 Cor. 7:9), points out that not marrying can also force one into an impossible situation. It is, accordingly, an option only for those especially qualified for it (vv. 11-12). More important, of course, he knew that the resources of the kingdom of the heavens were sufficient to resolve difficulties between husband and wife and to make their union rich and good before God and man--provided, of course, that both are prepared to seek and find these resources.

And we must remember, or course, what we have been saying all along about the order in the Sermon on the Mount. It is not an accident that Jesus deals with divorce after having dealt with anger, contempt, and obsessive desire. Just ask yourself how many divorces would occur, and in how many cases the question of divorce would never even have arisen, if anger, contempt, and obsessive fantasied desire were eliminated. The answer is, of course, hardly any at all.

In particular, the brutal treatment that women received in divorce in Jesus’ day--and now men to in our day--would simply not happen. Hard hearts may make divorce necessary to avoid greater harm, and hence make it permissible. But kingdom hearts are not hard, and they together can find ways to bear with each other, to speak truth in love, to change--often through times of great pain and distress--until the tender intimacy of mutual, covenant-framed love finds a way for the two lives to remain one, beautifully and increasingly.

Is, then, divorce ever justifiable for Jesus? I think it clearly is. His principle of the hardness of hearts allows it, though its application would require great care. It is never right to divorce as divorce was then done and as it is now usually done. And it makes no difference today whether you are a man or a woman.

Divorce, if it were rightly done, would be done as an act of love. It would be dictated by love and done for the honest good of the people involved. Such divorce, though rare, remains nonetheless possible and may be necessary. If it were truly done on the basis, it would be rightly done, in spite of the heartbreak and loss it is sure to involve.

[twa]

Not bad Mardi gras

I look at marriage as two flawed individuals combining their strengths to make a stronger whole(yes I admit to a flaw or two dozen;)) if done right.

[techboy]

Ok, here's what I consider to be the most helpful commentary on what Jesus had to say about divorce.

tl;dnr

[techboy]

Okay, seriously, that was an excellent piece, and a fine reminder that if one really wants to understand Scripture, one has to view it within the cultural context of a 1st century Palestinian, not a 21st century westerner.

(I would have put it in my last post, but I didn't want to spoil the irony).

[Special K]

lol

So is this in the religion of keestman? Because there are plenty of religions that have "categorized" sin.

Catholic is the only one that uses the terms mortal sin and venial sin, I believe.

There are plenty of denominations that view anything that separates one from God (a sin) as "equal" in terms of salvation

FYI I'm not Catholic. Your response was cute though.

[Special K]

That would depend on how you define forgiveness

There are no sins that Jesus's sacrifice will not cover(aside from rejection of that sacrifice imo)

However I do not believe you are shielded/immunized from the results of your sins in anyway other than that.

Knowingly going against God's will and sin that effects others carry a higher price so to speak

I don't believe repentance,nor God's forgiveness ,removes the consequences of our sins in any way other than salvation

My favorite example of that is David(a man after God's own heart) who sinned greatly and was forgiven...yet both he(and his family) and the nation he was head of suffered the repercussions from his sin.

to me it is a eternal salvation card,not a get out of jail card;)

That's pretty much what I believe.

[techboy]

That's pretty much what I believe.

I agree with twa too, but I didn't want to admit it publicly. :pfft:

[twa]

I agree with twa too, but I didn't want to admit it publicly. :pfft:

Don't worry,I'll wander off the reservation soon enough to justify your restraint;)

[mardi gras skin]

I agree with twa too, but I didn't want to admit it publicly. :pfft:

Lemmings.

[twa]

Lemmings.

OK maybe I've already left the reservation a time or two in spectacular fashion.

I was provoked:dunce:

[rdsknbill]

divorce is too much of a convenience for people that don't know what marriage is supposed to be. It isn't sunshine and rose pedals from the beginning. It is a commitment to each other. Sorry, most of you are quitters. And if you question me, I will be married to the mother of my three children for 22 years on September 3rd of this year.

I am not on this thread to be an *******. But get married for the right reasons. If you cheated on your wife? shame on you. If she took a ride with someone else Shame on her.

It is very simple, don't get married if you aren't preparedfor the long haul.

My wife will put me in the ground, or vice versa, before we end our marriage.

If you don't like my opinion? I really don't care.

[robotfire]

divorce is too much of a convenience for people that don't know what marriage is supposed to be. It isn't sunshine and rose pedals from the beginning. It is a commitment to each other. Sorry, most of you are quitters. And if you question me, I will be married to the mother of my three children for 22 years on September 3rd of this year.

I am not on this thread to be an *******. But get married for the right reasons. If you cheated on your wife? shame on you. If she took a ride with someone else Shame on her.

It is very simple, don't get married if you aren't preparedfor the long haul.

My wife will put me in the ground, or vice versa, before we end our marriage.

If you don't like my opinion? I really don't care.

Well said. I've been married for 8 years now, and we've got three kids. Everybody has storms. I'd have missed out on a wonderful marriage if I had quit during the tough times.

[rdsknbill]

Well said. I've been married for 8 years now, and we've got three kids. Everybody has storms. I'd have missed out on a wonderful marriage if I had quit during the tough times.

Brother, you got married one year after I did (age wise). My oldest is 19 and just finished his freshman year of college. Ride the tide baby! It's a good ride!!!!!!!!!!!!

[HailinginSeattle]

I don't think divorse is, not sure about divorce though.