Repentance After Unbiblical Divorce 非因姦淫而離婚後的悔改
✋JY’s question:
If a couple divorces for reasons other than adultery, how can they be repentant?
如果一對夫妻，因為姦淫以外的原因而離婚，他們要如何悔改？
✊T.A.’s answer:
It is true that God hates divorce(Malachi 2:16). Jesus said that if one marries the one who has been put away (but not for the reason of fornication) that he commits adultery. That is because in God's sight that person is still married to the first person. You ask how can they repent if they divorce, but not for the reason of fornication. I suppose it depends on the situation.
神確實討厭離婚（瑪拉基書2:16）。 耶穌說，如果一個人嫁給一個離婚的人（但不是因為姦淫的原因），那個人就犯了通姦。 那是因為在神看來，那個人仍然與第一個人結婚。 你問，如果他們因為非姦淫的原因而離婚了，他們怎麼能悔改？ 我想這取決於以下情況。
If a woman flees her husband because he beats her she can't divorce him for fornication, but she doesn't need to continue to live with him because he will continue to beat her.
如果一個女人因為丈夫打她而逃離，她不能因為姦淫而和他離婚，但她不需要繼續和他一起生活，因為他會繼續打她。
If there is a divorce neither one has the right to make another marriage. The husband needs to repent of his wicked behavior. The woman will have to remain unmarried. Sin always hurts everyone, especially those that are innocent.
如果他們離婚，那任一方都無權再婚。 丈夫需要懺悔他的邪惡行為。 這個女人也必須保持單身。 罪惡總是傷害每個人，特別是那些無辜的人。
If both husband and wife are tired of each other and divorce, they sin because neither one is showing proper love towards each other. They can not make another marriage. They should remember that God joined them together and they should not separate. They should get back together and love each other. This is how they should repent (Rom 7:2-3).
如果丈夫和妻子都厭倦了對方並離婚，他們就犯罪了，因為兩人都沒有對彼此表現出適當的愛。 他們不能再婚。 他們應該記住，神把他們結合在一起，他們不應該分開。 他們應該重新聚在一起，彼此相愛。 這就是他們應該悔改的方式 (Rom 7:2-3)。
Rom 7:2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
Rom 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
Rom 7:2 就如女人有了丈夫，丈夫還活著，就被律法約束；丈夫若死了，就脫離了丈夫的律法。
Rom 7:3 所以丈夫活著，他若歸於別人，便叫淫婦；丈夫若死了，他就脫離了丈夫的律法，雖然歸於別人，也不是淫婦。
I don't know if this gives you the answer that you want. Divorce and remarriage is allowed by God for only one reason, but sin is always present when divorce takes place; someone sins.
我不知道這是否能給你你想要的答案。 只有神能允許離婚和再婚，原因只有一個（姦淫）；但離婚時，罪總是存在的，因為有人犯了罪。
✊KTC’s answer:
Partners who are not divorced by adultery, who have left each other and have left God's covenant of marriage, have sinned against God and broken the sacred covenant of marriage, and are no longer husband and wife, and it is impossible to remarry. The writer of Hebrews said that marriage is sacred and should be respected by all. The Lord said in Matthew chapter 19 verse 9 that anyone who married the woman who was divorced was also guilty of sexual immorality. KJV says that “whosoever” marries the one who is divorced is also guilty of sexual immorality. (Translation helped by Ginger APP)
不是因奸淫而离婚的伴侣，离开了对方，也离开了神的婚姻之约，他们得罪了神，也毁了婚姻神圣的约，不再是夫妻，也不可能再复婚了。希伯来书的作者说婚姻是神圣的，人人都当尊重。主在马太19章9节说有人娶了那被休的妇女也是犯了淫乱。kjv说 whosoever 娶了那被休的，也是犯了淫乱。
👀 JY’s summary:
In other words, KTC believes that after the unbiblical divorce, they must remain celibate until the other party’s death. That is the way of their repentance.
換句話說，KTC認為他們如此離婚後，就只能保持獨身到對方死去，這就是他們的悔改。
But T.A. thinks they should make up as much as possible, love each other, and remarry. According to G.B. and J.G.’s opinions, they also believes that if the couple is not divorced due to adultery, they can still remarry each other later.
而T.A.認為他們應該盡可能和好，彼此相愛，再婚。根據G.B.、J.G.的意見，也認為若非因姦淫而離婚的夫妻，之後仍可與彼此再婚。
✋JY’s further question on 1 Cor 7:10-11 “leave” and “reconcile”?
JY的進一步問題，關於1 Cor 7:10-11“離開”與“和好”?
How to explain 1 Cor 7:10-11? If not divorced because of adultery, aren't the two still husband and wife?!
如何解釋1 Cor 7:10-11？非因姦淫而離婚，兩人不仍是夫妻嗎？！
1Co 7:10 But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband 1Co 7:11 (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
1Co 7:10 至於那已經嫁娶的，我吩咐他們；其實不是我吩咐，乃是主吩咐說：妻子不可離開丈夫， 1Co 7:11 若是離開了，不可再嫁，或是仍同丈夫和好。丈夫也不可離棄妻子。
📖 Vine's dictionary on “depart” (KJV) here:
Vine字典關於這裡“離開”的解釋：
Depart: chorizo (G5563), "to put apart, separate," means, in the middle voice, "to separate oneself, to depart from," Act 1:4; Act 18:1-2; in marital affairs, 1Co 7:10-11, 1Co 7:15; "departed" (RV corrects to "was parted"), Phm 1:15. The verb is also used in Mat 19:6; Mrk 10:9; Rom 8:35, Rom 8:39; Heb 7:26. See PUT, No. 14, SEPARATE.
✊K’s answer：
In the New Testament, the word "divorce" is used only the Greek word "apoluo", and other words do not refer to divorce. The Greek word is not used for "leave" in 1 Cor 7, so it is just a separation, excluding "divorce".
在新約中用「離婚」divorce 這個字的只有「apoluo」這個希臘字，其他字不是指離婚。在1 Cor 7的「離開」用的不是這個希臘字，所以只是分居，不包括「離婚」。
📖 Strong’s dictionary on “apoluo”:
希臘文字典Strong對“離婚”一字的使用：
apoluo (G630), "to let loose from, let go free" (apo, "from," luo, "to loose"), is translated "is divorced" in the KJV of Mat 5:32 (RV, "is put away"); it is further used of "divorce" in Mat 1:19; Mat 19:3, Mat 19:7-9; Mrk 10:2, Mrk 10:4, Mrk 10:11; Luk 16:18. The Lord also used it of the case of a wife putting away her husband, Mrk 10:12, a usage among Greeks and Romans, not among Jews. See DISMISS.
✋JY’s further question on 1 Cor 11:7 “unmarried”?
JY的進一步問題，關於1 Cor 11:7“不可再嫁” 英文為何用“unmarried” ?
✊TA’s answer:
No indication that she divorced him. In that time period it would not have been easy for a woman to divorce. It was much more likely for a man to have the power to divorce. But if she left her husband it is somewhat like not being married, for she was not sharing a bed or responsibilities with her husband. Even though she left her husband, God did not allow her to make another marriage. She must either be reconciled with her husband or remain celibate the rest of her life or at least until her husband died.
沒有跡象表明她和他離婚了。 在那段時間裡，女人離婚並不容易。 男人更有可能有權力離婚。 但如果她離開了丈夫，這有點像沒有結婚，因為她沒有和丈夫共睡一張床或分擔責任。 儘管她離開了丈夫，但神不允許她再婚。 她要麼與丈夫和解，要麼終身保持獨身，至少直到她丈夫去世。
✊Supplementary info. on 1 Cor 7:11 from Coffman：
科夫曼關於1 Cor 7:11的補充資訊：
1 Cor 7:11 -- Paul left out of view in this verse the exception Jesus gave in Matthew 19:9, "except it be for fornication"; but this may not be construed as a denial of it. Paul’s failure to mention the exception was likely due to the fact that it did not apply in the case propounded by the letter from Corinth. As DeHoff said, "Paul told her either to remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. Divorce never solves a problem; it only creates more problems." Of course, exactly the same rule applied to husbands who left their wives.
保羅並沒有在1 Cor 7:11中，對耶穌在馬太福音19：9中給出的唯一例外（“除非是為了姦淫”）視而不見。 保羅沒有提到 Mt 19:9這個例外，可能是因為它不適用於哥林多信中提出的案件。 正如DeHoff所說，“Paul告訴她要麼不婚，要麼與丈夫和解。 離婚永遠不會解決問題；它只會造成更多的問題。” 當然，同樣的規則也適用於離開妻子的丈夫。
1 Cor 7:15 (KJV) 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.
倘若那不信的人要離去，就由他離去吧！無論是弟兄，是姐妹，遇著這樣的事都不必拘束。神召我們原是要我們和睦。
The brother or sister is not under bondage … Some question whether or not such a brother or sister might remarry; but the view here is that, if not, then the brother or sister would still be in bondage. This is another exception, distinguished from the "adultery" mentioned by the Lord (Matthew 19:9), but the desertion of a Christian partner by an unbeliever is thought by some to be presumptive proof of adultery also. Besides that, Paul was dealing with mixed marriages, which were not in the purview of Jesus’ teaching at all. Many have disputed this interpretation. DeHoff declared that "This does not mean that he (the forsaken one) is free to marry again." David Lipscomb also believed that, "In such cases, remarriage is not approved"; but he went on to add that if the departing unbeliever should marry again, the wife or husband forsaken would be at liberty to remarry.
有人質疑這樣的兄弟或姐妹是否可以再婚；他們的觀點是，如果不可，那麼兄弟或姐妹仍然被前婚束縛。 1 Cor 7:11是一個例外，與主提到的“姦淫”（馬太福音19：9）不同，而且不信者拋棄基督徒伴侶，也被一些人認為是姦淫的推定證據。 除此之外，還有人說保羅正在處理的是異族通婚，所以根本不在耶穌的教導範圍之內。 但是許多人對這種解釋都提出異議—— DeHoff宣稱：“這並不意味著他（被遺棄的人）可以再次自由結婚。” 大衛·利普斯科姆還認為，“在這種情況下，再婚是不被允許的”；但他繼續補充說，“如果離開的不信者再婚，被遺棄的妻子或丈夫將可以自由再婚。”
（Coffman https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bcc/1-corinthians-7.html）
✊Supplementary info. on 1 Cor 7:15 from Wayne Jackson：
韋恩·傑克遜關於1 Cor 7:15 “depart” 的補充資訊：
Some contend that the term chorizo is used in verse 15 of divorce. The word is related to choris which means “separately, apart, by itself.” Chorizo simply means to “divide” or “separate” (cf. Rom. 8:35; Heb. 7:26; Philem. 15).
一些人爭辯說，chorizo一詞在離婚的第15節中使用。 這個詞與choris有關，choris的意思是“分開，分開，單獨”。 Chorizosimply意味著“分割”或“分離”（參見 羅馬書 8:35；希伯來書 7:26；Philem 15).
The term is generic, and thus may include divorce, as Matthew 19:6 indicates, but there is no indication that it means divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, 15 (though some lexicographers, leaving their areas of expertise and assuming the role of commentators, have so designated it).
該術語是通用的，因此可能包括離婚，正如馬太福音19:6所示，但沒有跡象表明它在哥林多前書7:10-11，15中意味著離婚（儘管一些詞典編纂者離開了他們的專業領域，承擔了注釋者的角色，而這樣認定了它）。
(Wayne Jackson https://christiancourier.com/articles/what-is-the-meaning-of-not-under-bondage-1-cor-7-15)
✊Supplementary info. on Mt 19:9b from Boat Wright：
Matthew 19:9b "And whoever marries her that is divorced commits adultery." Why? Because in God’s eyes her new husband is having intercourse with someone else’s wife. That person is still under obligation and bound to his or her first spouse "as long as he lives" (Romans 7:2-3).
馬太福音19：9b“有人娶那被休的婦人，也是犯姦淫了。” 為什麼？ 因為在神眼裡，她的第二任丈夫正在與別人的妻子發生性關係。 “只要第一任丈夫仍活著”，那位婦人仍然對第一任配偶有婚姻的義務，並受其約束（羅馬書7：2-3）。
(https://www.newtestamentchurch.org/Boatwright/mdr/page_3.htm)
👀JY’s summary：
到目前為止，我越想越覺得，若在非姦淫的情況下離婚，之後不但不可跟其他人結婚，也不可與對方復婚。否則，就留下了漏洞，讓離婚視同兒戲，因為雙方永遠有後路可走，就是跟對方再婚。 如果堵住了這條後路，離婚率應該會大大減低，因為形同宣判獨身終生。
K要我向Ｅ要Goebel Music所寫的一本書「Divorce」(1978) 來看。但是Ｅ還沒找到，目前我拿到的是Ｅ借給我的另一本——Jim Laws編纂的「Marriage, Divorce & Remarriage」(1997)。當中看到了比較接近Ｋ的觀點是：因為姦淫離婚的有罪的一方，不可和原配偶再婚。
眼前的問題，雖是非因姦淫而離婚，但雙方還是因此犯罪了，又怎麼能當作沒事一樣，再與原配偶再婚呢？對於離婚是否應該更加慎重呢？如果與一個人貿然離婚，不也是犯下不尊重婚約的罪嗎？不尊重婚約的人，神會允許他們反覆再婚嗎？
Ｐ說就是因為他們犯了「不該離婚」的錯，「獨身」就是他們應該承擔的後果。我的疑問是：非因姦淫而離婚，可能是一時溝通不良衝動而造成的，難道神真的就因此要懲罰他們一輩子都不能再和任何人結婚？
以上這是我仍在思考的問題。雖然多數說也很有它的道理，但是對待婚姻的嚴肅程度，似乎Ｋ確實是超出許多，這是否更合乎神恨惡離婚的態度 (Mal 2:15)？
Ｋ有提過，若法院判決沒有記載因為姦淫而離婚，那麼無辜的一方要吃虧了（即不能與他人再婚）。這是否把政府文件的效力凌駕到神的律法之上了？Ｐ提醒我，那是因為證婚的弟兄，必須要看到有「姦淫」的證據（法院判決），才敢去證婚。婚姻的現實問題，豈是現在的我能想像？
K has mentioned that if the court judgement does not record divorce due to fornication, then the innocent party will suffer losses (that is, he cannot remarry another one). Does this override the effectiveness of government documents above God's law? P reminds me that it is because the brother who is to solemnise must see the evidence of "fornication" (court judgement) before he dares to solemnise the marriage. The reality of marriage, how can I imagine it now?
但我相信神是公平的，也知道一切，只要事實上有姦淫的證據，法院判決沒有記載姦淫又怎樣呢？無辜的一方還是有權再婚啊，畢竟婚姻制度是以神的律法為最高的依歸。只是，再婚者手裡還是要有拿得出的證據才行，否則怎能得到教會，尤其領導弟兄們的許可與祝福呢？
But I believe that God is fair and knows everything. As long as there is evidence of adultery in fact, what if the court judgement does not record adultery? The innocent party still has the right to remarry. After all, the marriage system is based on the law of God. However, remarried people still have to have the evidence in their hands, otherwise how can they get the permission and blessings of the church, especially the leaders?
✊Johnson’s Answer:
- 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 ― She is required to return to the first husband. 她被要求回到第一任丈夫身邊。
- If they are not still bound as married how could he command her to return to her husband?
如果他們彼此不仍被婚姻束縛，保羅怎麼能命令她回到她丈夫身邊？ - 1 Corinthians 7:11—The woman who departs still has a husband.
離開的女人仍然有丈夫。 - The Lord commanded her to be reconciled to her husband, not her former husband.
主吩咐她與「丈夫」和好，而不是與「前夫」和好。 - Thus the wife in 1 Cor 7:11 who has departed continues to have a husband.
因此，在哥林多前書7:11中離開的妻子仍然有一個丈夫。 - Thus the wife 1 Cor 7:11 who has departed must still be married.
因此，已經離開的妻子在哥林多前書7:11必須仍是在已婚的狀態。 - Thus God does not recognize any court of law decree that the divorced woman has no husband.
因此，神不承認任何法院關於離婚婦女就沒有丈夫的裁決。 - The Lord commanded the sister to be reconciled, not remarried to her husband.
耶和華吩咐這位姐妹去和好，而不是與丈夫再婚。 - If a divorce has taken place, reconciliation is not enough to put them back together.
如果離婚產生了，那麼「和好」不足以讓他們重新在一起。 - If a divorce has taken place they must remarry.
如果離婚產生了，那他們必須「再婚」。 - The husband is commanded not to put away his wife.
丈夫被命令不可棄棄他的妻子。 - The “put away” is not necessarily divorce even if it is used in context of a divorce.
“離棄”不一定是指離婚，即使它是在上下文有離婚的情形中被使用。
NT:863 aphiemi (af-ee'-ay-mee); from NT:575 and hiemi (to send; an intens. form of eimi, to go); to send forth, in various applications (as follow):
- 1 Corinthians 7:11—Then what does the command to ‘remain unmarried’ refer to?
那麼“不可再嫁”的命令指的是什麼？
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.
若是離開了，不可再嫁，或是仍同丈夫和好。丈夫也不可離棄妻子。
- If she is still married to her husband there is only one sense in which the command could be given.
如果她仍然與丈夫在婚姻關係中，那麼只能有一種解釋。 - She is commanded to “remain unmarried” from anyone else.
她被命令“不可嫁給其他人”。 - 1 Cor 7:12—The word asfihmi even in verse 12 is not necessarily divorce.
即使在第12節中，asfihmi這個詞也不一定是離婚。
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
我對其餘的人說（不是主說）：倘若某弟兄有不信的妻子，妻子也情願和他同住，他就不要離棄妻子。
- It is true that it can be used as divorce, but not necessarily so.
的確，「離棄」可以被用作離婚，但在這裡不一定如此使用。 - Matthew 5:31—A different word is used for divorce in the NT
在新約中，離婚用了一個不同的詞
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away (630) his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement (647):
又有話說：『人若休妻，就當給他休書。』
NT:647 apostasion (ap-os-tas'-ee-on); neuter of a (presumed) adj. from a derivative of NT:868; properly, something separative, i.e. (specially) divorce:
NT:630 apoluo (ap-ol-oo'-o); from NT:575 and NT:3089; to free fully, i.e. (literally) relieve, release, dismiss (reflexively, depart), or (figuratively) let die, pardon or (specially) divorce:
- Apoluo is used for divorce.
Apoluo用於離婚。
Thus we conclude concerning 1 Cor 7:10-11:
因此，我們總結了1 Cor 7:10-11：
- 1) Because he refers to her husband as her husband, he must still be her husband.
因為他被稱為她的丈夫，所以他必定仍然是她的丈夫。
- If he is still her husband, they cannot have been divorced.
如果他還是她的丈夫，他們不可能已經離婚。
- 2) If the sister divorced her husband then he would have to be called her former husband, which the scriptures do not.
如果這位姐妹與丈夫離婚，那麼他會不得不被稱為她的「前夫」，但經文沒有這樣講。 - 3) If the husband is not her former husband, but here husband, then she must still be married to him.
如果這位丈夫不是她的前夫，而是這裡所講的「丈夫」，那麼她必定和他仍處於婚姻關係中。 - 4) If she is still married to her husband then she can be reconciled.
如果她與丈夫仍在婚姻關係中，她就可以與他和好。 - 5) If she can be reconciled to her husband there is no need to remarry him.
如果她能與丈夫和好，就沒有再婚的必要。 - 6) Since the sister can be reconciled to her husband, the command to remain unmarried must refer to someone she is not already married to.
由於這位姐妹可以與丈夫和好，「不可再嫁」的命令必定是指「她不可嫁給丈夫以外的人」。 - 7) Since she is commanded to remain unmarried, the command cannot refer to remaining unmarried from her husband.
由於她被命令「不可再嫁給別人」，這不可能包括「與丈夫離婚」的情況。
👀 JY’s Summary:
So, to make a conclusion, if a couple divorced for any reason other than fornication, none of them is eligible for any marriage the rest of their lives.
因此，得出結論，如果一對夫婦因姦淫以外的任何原因離婚，他們都沒資格在餘生中結婚。
*But my point has changed in the later post:
但是我的觀點在較新的文章中改變了：
留言
張貼留言