Quote
Tom said:
The words "not under bondage" (I can’t say this with absolute certainty), would seem to indicate that the believing spouse is free to leave the marriage. I say that because I don't see anything in the context, to show that it is talking about anything other than the marriage in question.
Now I am not saying that remarriage is out of the question, I am just not confident that we can justify remarriage from this verse.
1) I'm not following your reasoning here, Tom. How would this text say the believing spouse is free to "leave the marriage", when it is talking about the unbelieving spouse having already left the marriage? scratch1

2) Why would one who is no longer "under bondage", i.e., bound to the marriage covenant not be free to remarry? Is there some sin involved by the believing spouse should the unbelieving spouse desert? Are there specific conditions that must be met before a believer is warranted to remarry? I can only think of the "exception clause" in Matt. 5:32. It would appear that Paul is adding a second reason where divorce is legitimate. But is your view that even though Paul says that the believer has warrant from God to divorce an unbelieving spouse who has deserted the marriage, they have no warrant to remarry in the Lord? And do you think that Paul should have been obligated to mention remarriage in this particular text if there was a question about it? giggle

In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]