Question about 1 Cor. 7:11

[Transmogrified]

Hello All...I had a question as to how what God is really saying here. He first tells the woman that she is forbidden to depart from her husband when he says: But to the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband..." So far so good. But then he gives her two choices if she does decide to depart anyway. She can 1) remain unmarried...or she can 2) Be reconciled to her husband. There seems to something horribly wrong with this scenario and I am not doubting God's Word at all, but in looking at this it seems the woman is free to just leave her husband as long as she just doesn't marry someone else. I'm not sure if you can see the ramifications of this, but essentially the husband is now without a wife through her disobedience to God and God seems to be ok with this.

Just to reiterate, it does not say she should remain unmarried AND be reconciled, but rather she is to remain unmarried OR be reconciled. So if chooses, she can be reconciled or not. What this does is it leaves the husband without a wife, and no recourse at all if she chooses not to be reconciled to him....and here again, God seems to be ok with this. I just can not imagine God giving sanction to the woman to leave her husband in direct disobedience to him, and then give her the option if she wants to be reconciled or not. She was the one who disobeyed God and God himself seems to be ok with it. Its like as if God said 'Don't commit adultery, but if you want to its ok."

Is there a translation problem here, or what am I not seeing? It seems God is contradicting himself.

 

[Br. Bear]

Greetings changed one
,

It may help to also remember the way it has been until more recently
Married woman separated from husband equals woman not with family and hence of dubious reputation and or predicament to the people who not of her life
Questions arise and rumor around as to this woman

Not a delightful space to be in

Today we see more and more that society is okay with woman being single regardless of reason so we are in a mess as to the appropriateness of the passage you ask about

God knows what He is doing
It is people who are confused

Can you see that woman was not given a ticket to split and divorce as claim her life as her own ?
Perhaps see that the unmarried needed some form of family and identity and anything else might be frowned upon or at least be uncomfortable and unbecoming
Also perhaps the passage you ask about basically provides only one option which is to remain married


Bless you ><>

 

[Transmogrified]

Can you see that woman was not given a ticket to split and divorce as claim her life as her own ?

Hello- I would like to think that what you are saying is true, that she was not given a ticket to claim her life as her own, but it does seem she is given at least partial freedom to do what otherwise would be prohibited. In other words, she could go ahead and file faulty divorce papers and leave her husband with the only restriction that she could not marry any one else. I am just having a hard time thinking a believing woman just up and leave on these type of conditions, and then on top of that she has the 'option' (not requirement) that she could be reconciled with her husband. She treats him that way and then has the option to be reconciled? It just doesn't seem right with how this is being portrayed. I am not saying Paul is wrong, but there must be something huge I am not understanding or there is a translation issue or something.

 

[Ivan Chamurliev]

Can you see that woman was not given a ticket to split and divorce as claim her life as her own ?

Hello- I would like to think that what you are saying is true, that she was not given a ticket to claim her life as her own, but it does seem she is given at least partial freedom to do what otherwise would be prohibited. In other words, she could go ahead and file faulty divorce papers and leave her husband with the only restriction that she could not marry any one else. I am just having a hard time thinking a believing woman just up and leave on these type of conditions, and then on top of that she has the 'option' (not requirement) that she could be reconciled with her husband. She treats him that way and then has the option to be reconciled? It just doesn't seem right with how this is being portrayed. I am not saying Paul is wrong, but there must be something huge I am not understanding or there is a translation issue or something.

We need to read 1Cor 7:10 where it says that "a wife is not to depart from her husband". And it says that that Lord commands that. Therefore what it speaks after about leaving her husband is her choice. It doesn't say it's a good one. People make wrong choices, but what the Lord wants is the best for us. And He has created a man and his wife to be together. Anyway it says that if she does depart not to marry again, but the only option she's got is to go back to her husband and this points again the desire of God for them to be together.

 

[Samson2020]

Well in the passage they are both believers. I believe that if the wife goes there must be a problem within the relationship. i.e. she can't handle forgiving him, or whatever else is occurring in the marriage.
Once and if she leaves she is to remain unmarried. In our society (US) she would be required to get a divorce in order to remarry, and at that time become an adulterer (once new marriage is consummated),unless she became one before getting the divorce etc.... Which would free the husband to be remarried as the only allowable thing for divorcement is adultery. This is why God divorced the Children of Israel from the first covenant, Their adultery.
That said if the woman remains true to her husband, or not, she could come back and be reconciled or be forgiven and reconciled. And we all know that even if she did commit adultery she can still be forgiven by the Lord. Question is can the husband forgive her? Sure, but that doesn't mean he has to be reconciled to her for he has the right to divorce her and stay unmarried or remarry in the Lord if indeed she was committing adultery while separated from him. And although the verse speaks to the woman it could be turned around and spoken to the man as well.
In the scenario it would be best for the husband to be reconciled to her no matter what, for this is Love, not fleshly but AGAPE love the substance of God,
which is what we all attain too. Jesus I believe would say, He or she who is without sin cast the first stone. And since we all have sin then reconciliation is the only course.

I remember when I first became a True Christian and was full of that spirit of love in an overflowing way, my wife who was not and still isn't a believer, was told by me that no matter what she did I would always forgive her. It wasn't because I loved her so much fleshly speaking it was because he who was in me loved her that much. As I get to be more mature in the Lord the me loving her more becomes easier as I start seeing her the same way God saw us all before he sent Jesus. As sinners that were dying in their sin and were in desperate need of light to shine upon the darkness they exist in.

Just my take.