₦airaland Forum

Bollinger:
Are you high? I bet you won't be saying this if you were a woman.

No, I am not high, and even if I were, with time I would come down . I did not post based on my sex, but on the clear reading of scripture. Does time do anything for a slopey forehead?


TV

repogirl:
Some pastors divorce for lesser reasons, are you saying they are going to hell? Even someone like Pastor Chris Oyakhilome whose wife divorced him for irreconcilable differences?

I said nothing - simply presented a reading of scripture. Whatever any pastor - or their spouse - of any name,standing or repute amongst men does, that does not change the scriptural writ.

If you have a different reading or interpretation, feel free to present it - with reasons. And, should anyone prefer to predicate their Christian walk on the life of "pastors or their spouses", again, they are free to do so. My position remains as is, unless anyone can show otherwise.


TV

teemy:

In the midst of conflict words are subject to multiemotional interpretation.

...agreed, but we are not fighting ...although I guess OP and his missus were. Best. TV

mazazatonda:
Should i look for elsewhere or simplly divorce her?.

No & no.

Impress upon her how much it means to you, and how you would love to share the act with her - likewise learn what pleases her (and if there are reasons for any hang-ups). Continue to be a great husband, with time, hopefully. If not, continue to be a great husband . I'm serious 0!


TV

^{...what a user name}

missjo:
I'm very sorry to have quoted you earlier trying to relate your Christian values with the way you insult,talkdown,and bully people here. I was genuinely curious,but it's obvious your ego got a hit and now you can't get over it even after I wished you a lovely week.

Do have a lovely week once more.

missjo:
He may not be,however he does have insecurities.

You are a plain-faced, brown-nosing dullard, who offers little more than nuisance value!

Do have a pleasant evening


TV

^{...I learn fast and l like this game}

teemy:
tv01 depends on interpretation when he said her actions could lead to the end of the marriage. he threatened her first. imagine someone telling you that your unfriendly act of not borrowing him money could lead to the end of your friendship.

...a very generous interpretation at best . The analogy is also somewhat skewed. A better one would be; Two friends in a car. The driver is being really reckless and his friend says "if you keep driving this way, you could get us killed".

A warning, a note of caution, an alarm. Not a threat, as the possible outcome is not what he - and neither his friend, one would suppose - actually desires.


TV

Coco, whats up? No where did he threaten to end his marriage, he merely - and rightly so - pointed out how it could end if they did not fix up. He did exactly the right thing, by having an honest state of the nation" talk with his wife. Haba, are we all so jaundiced now

cococandy:
If you don't want your marriage to end, don't threaten your wife with it. Why did you bring that up if you still want the marriage? Except you wanted her to panic and start begging you because you threatened divorce. Is that why you were hurt when she called your bluff?

Both of you are immature. She gives silent treatment, you reject meals.
Fix yourself too. I don't believe it's all her fault.

teemy:
jonesy1, you threatened separation

No he did not.

Cordis92:
I'm not trying to support her or you but why threaten her that her behaviour may sever the marriage?

He didn't threaten anything.


TV

Me & Mrs Jones ...

An honest sounding - almost heart on shirtsleeve type post - great start.

The little back story you've provided sounds somewhat odd. A late 20's - still relatively young - couple, one raised in the West and the other in Nigeria. That's serious culture clashing right there; no matter how Africanised your upbringing was or butterish hers.

It also begs tons of questions, from your basic maturity, to your inherent compatibility, along with quite a few others actually. So for example, your thinking she should "go home for a few months", are you sponsoring her stay? How much a part of the "bargain" is that? How do you think that would help?

Sounds like a relatively short - or long distance - courtship, where everything went swimmingly, then straight after the wedding, gbam, a kaleidoscope of true colours .

This basically boils down to two things, how committed you are to making this work and your wife' real motive. If you are both committed regardless, but simply "acting up" it will probably hold, even if not very lovingly for a time.

If she indeed had an undisclosed agenda which involves ditching you at some point, you need God - not one of his lower ranking serfs - to intervene . In any event, a deep faith - if you possess it - can only help!

If it's the former, simply take a long-term view. Be the leader of your home, demonstrate maturity, sensitivity and the committed husband like qualities that will, over time, bring her to a place of respecting you, your union, and being secure in it.

Model exactly what you would like her to reciprocate. But do not pander or fawn over her. Do not be be swayed by, or respond to, her every emotional gambit

If it's the latter, my Boss is always available .


All the best

TV

Jonesy1:
Hi All,

Not sure where to even start so I guess its best just to jump right in.

I have been married for a year or so now. My wife was born and raised in Nigeria (Lagos). We both are in our late 20s. I was born and raised in the Canada, but currently am in the US (Consider myself Nigerian-Canadian-American lol). Since our marriage ceremony I have found many issues with my wife. I am by no means perfect, however the majority of problems we have had over the last year have been numerous and all are instigated by her. At this very moment she is in the other room and we have not spoken for a few days now because of a quarrel. Due to her immaturity she uses the cold shoulder tactic. Every few weeks, like a cycle, a petty, needless argument will lead to my wife to not speak to me for 2, 3, 4 days. Some times even a week of not speaking or barely speaking to me (she did this right before Christmas!). When I say petty I mean really useless arguments over getting her hair braided, forgetting to do something in the kitchen, etc.

Anyways, this past week I made it known during our most recent argument about her behavior that this habit of shutting herself off for days at a time over nonsense matters was poisonous to our marriage and that it, along with other immature habits I won't name, will lead to the end of our marriage. In response she says, "Good! I want it to end. I want it to burn to the fucking ground!" As you can imagine I was hurt by this comment to say the least. I told her if thats the way she feels she can return to her father house.

I am seriously considering a separation. Maybe she should return home for some months? At this moment in time I have refused to eat the meals she prepares for 2 days now. She has begged for forgiveness and I have forgiven her, but the damage has already been done. Its hard to get past hearing that someone you have sacrificed so much for can say such a thing. Even if she is angry.

Anyways sha. I know that was some long reading, but I needed somewhere to vent. Is refusing her meals petty? How do I recover from hearing something so terrible especially when we have been having ongoing issues since the beginning. Any feedback is appreciated. And please feel free to tease me as well. I could use a laugh in this moment

Timbuktou:
Great news, bruv. I pray he excels beyond your hopes. It's always comforting to see the next generation of soldiers being groomed. With the rise of foolishness, too many effete men running around these days. Send regards from me, and the Queen and Princess, of course.

Graciás - may the Lord bless us in our generations - even those yet unseen - and give us the grace to raise our sons to "quit themselves like men" and raise accomplished daughters to become the choice and cherish of such men".

TV

This can be more complicated than at first appears.

One would hope the necessity simply wouldn't be there. By reason of closeness and proximity, I have no reason to doubt the paternity of my children. Secondly, the boy has some unique characteristics passed down through our male lineage - funnily enough I didn't check with my daughter.

If one has any reason to suspect, then how will you have peace if you don't verify? As was mentioned, not just for cheating, but for swaps, which actually happen to criminal order sometimes - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/02/el-salvador-british-man-and-wife-in-baby-swap-ordeal-take-son-home.

Our new femcentric era in the West has made inroads even here. In some countries - most notably France - a man cannot DNA test his supposed offspring, without approval from the mother.

I've actually heard of cases where the result was "not yours mate" be he was still ordered to provide for the child till they turned 18 .


TV

Timbuktou:
Maybe he's trying to solicit offerings? . You can't upset the people's feelz too much.

Maybe offerings = "Likes"; sadder than I imagined .

On another note, my man started school this past September. He's doing so well I'm made up. Chip off the old block


TV

Timbuktou:
Baba, which one be husband-rustler again? .

Back in the wild west, the sentence for rustling - horses or cattle - was capital. Even if we no longer stone them, they shouldn't be allowed in polite company - not to mention casually taking the scriptures into their "chop and clean" mouths

Timbuktou:
Per Adegbulu, he did seem biased toward women, which is why I'd assumed he actually is in support of divorce. I just gave him the benefit of the doubt of trying to pass the message indirectly. Sort of him playing devil's advocate, no pun intended.

You shouldn't have retracted - he subtly hinted at it - or made it ambiguous - 5 time on the first page alone. Like I said, wolf. Pickabeau1 put it best, Christianity and feminism are like oil and water. He best choose who he wants to serve and do it wholeheartedly.

Timbuktou:
OLAADEGBU, I ask again, what makes TV an abuser? Or does he have to argue the Bible apologetically like you seem to be doing. Seeming to not have confidence in what you espouse?

I'm an abuser because I make no bones about presenting the bible as I truly believe it - even if wrong, I am happy to be challenged. Note how he has not made one reference to scripture. Baba nla feel good preacher .


TV

Timbuktou:
You and TV have the same beliefs from what I know of you both, at least as regards divorce, and your comments on this thread. Referring to him as an abuser because he approaches the topic dispassionately is womanly. Is there anything he has said that you do not believe in? If so, please it/them out.

On the face of it maybe, but in action Olaadegbu is neither fish nor fowl. He knows the truth of Gods word. No divorce, but he ardently desires the approval of the unrepentant serial divorcees and fornicators who have swarmed this thread, hence him not making that assertion ab initio.

Instead making it sound like divorce is a solution to the nebulously framed "abuse" he presented. Wolf in sheeps clothing . What Ola should have done - if not for his love of applause & validation from men - is too have made the biblical position clear, and presented biblically based criteria to avoid abuse foundationally, or remedy it should it occur post nuptials.

Now he's stuck, so he's making it personal - don't they all - trying to paint me as an abuser . After I clearly stated that abuse has no place in a Christian marriage, and should not actually be found in any well-constituted union. Let me go and bring pictures

TV01:
You are still flailing about trying to make sense of this. Firstly, a Christian marriage built on the right foundations will not have such serious issues. Non-Christian marriages sef.

TV01:
...and following, is there any Chriistian writ to marry or conduct marriage with abuse as a subtext ?

TV01:
Are you irretrievably dull ? What you wrote up there is akin to saying "my bank doesn't allow overdrafts, therefore it's ok to steal" . Let me ask you - does the bible permit or condone abuse?

TV01:
If abuse - as opposed to low level conflict - occurs in a marriage, spouses should seek immediate resolution. Even low level conflict should not be a feature of a healthy marriage, let alone a christian one. Love & submission. How hard is that ?

OLAADEGBU:
More evidence that you are not only an abuser but also a bully. Answer the question and move on. Is abuse scriptural?

I've heard you that the bible does not permit dissolution of a consummated marriage but are you a true Christian? Do you abuse your spouse?

Querying my marriage - The serial divorcee and husband rustler he smooches with, and embraces the ignorant fornicator. Ask missjo for the spade when she's done!


TV

RiloKiley:
Tv01, Timbuktou, crackhaus.

Our lived experience and years of received wisdom cannot be denied . No woman has ever listed "chore expert" as a must in a potential spouse .

If chores being done by the man are as a result of his or his wife' push for equality, then danger. Women do not generally want equals, they want bosses .

If it's a man who delivers in terms of his masculinity who makes a freewill decision to be involved - seeing them not as chores, but him running his household - nothing spoil. In fact, his wife will look up to him all the more, and know she better not slack as he no send .


TV

Timbuktou:
This sounds like something that would come out if the mouth of a woman or someone whose capacity for logic is zero.

...a dimwit with gender dysphoria

OLAADEGBU:
Show you what?

What you are on about? What your point is. Is divorce permitted scripturally - for any reason? What is the scriptural response to "abuse" - of any kind?

OLAADEGBU:
That is the case. Those who trivialise abuse in marriage are only showing themselves to be domestic abusers.

...oh dearie me...I'm going to have to get the pictures out

OLAADEGBU:
Are you TV's spokesman/woman? Let TV deny that he hasn't trivialised abuse and then I may entertain him as I deem fit.

...it is you who has trivialised marriage - which is till death do part - according to the bible. By seeming to suggest that divorce should be allowed for abuse - playing to the gallery of the "worship ma feelins" crowd .

Knowing what the bible says, and being unable to refute or respond affirming your implicit suggestion, in the face of the sound exegesis you have been hose-piped with , you are now trying to claim "trivialisation". It's the old "has God truly said" ruse. It will not work here .

The bible does not permit dissolution of a consummated marital union for any reason. True Christians will not abuse their spouses - in the event of "problems", they will seek, forgiveness, healing and restoration, not divorce.

You know full well the bible does not permit divorce, but you pivoted your OP on divorce. Not the basis of solid marriages at foundation, how to ensure unions are robust, or remedies for abuse, incipient or aggravated.

That's why you got lots of applause from assorted "feelins chasers" and twice divorced husband snatchers - which is presumably what you were after . You have craftily questioned the holy writ, debased true marriage, pushed divorce and valorised abuse. Shame on you .

You entertain me? You are for my amusement. I'm toying with you - although fast tiring of that .


TV

nickxtra:
My brothers and sisters, i think am contemplating of what action to take against her and am contemplating a divorce, but our two children are still very small for this. I want to report this issue to her family and mine. Am gradually withdrawing my trust for her.

I need matured advice and suggestions that will see me through this.

Hi Nick,

Sorry to hear your plight. Your wife has broken trust - and in a way that could have affected the fundamentals of your decision to marry her. Please forgive her, strongly impress upon her the kind of openness and honesty you expect in your relationship, and help her work towards it by showing her you are committed to her come what may. Do not take this issue to any outside parties.

Lies & betrayal can come much worse than this - more later. She was attractive enough for you to marry and not suspect anything. Work with her to ensure she retains her youthfulness - do likewise yourself. Continue to delight in her physically. Hopefully your sexual journeys will perfectly align.

Thank you for putting your children first,but I'm actually asking you to put your wife first regardless. I sense you believe - be that Godly man.


******************************************************************************************************************

The basic/carnal women will lie about inter-alia;

The length, volume and even origin of her hair
The fullness and curve of her eyebrows
The plumpness and shape of her lips
The perkiness of her breasts
Her looks generally, and her height and weight
The flatness of her tummy and the narrowness of her waist
The "sticky-outiness" of her bottom
The length and leanness of her legs
Her shoe size - hence the numerous callouses and bunions
The number of lovers she has had
The number of abortions she has performed
How many children she has - if she actually tells at all
How many friends she has, how in demand she is, the men after her, her job
She'll lie about how good a person she is, how loyal, how committed and how hard-working
She'll lie about why she got divorced, why she stole her friends man

She'll lie to herself about how the lies are actually good, for the best and really a form of "attenuated truth"
She'll not only overlook, she'll actually support the lies of other women at a "group" level, for that validates and justifies her own lies (manifold examples on this thread alone)

Oga, if that's the only thing, you actually got off pretty lightly


TV

missjo:
It was a simple question,but now that I see you going on the defensive and finding a way to still talk down on me before getting to type 50 complete words, is just sad to be honest.

Again I ask,is this the Christian way?

There is simply no pleasing some people is there?? . I answered you in a way that fully met the expectations you set out; bullying, insulting and down talking - and you still aren't happy .

You opened by making unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations against me and then claim I went on the defensive . You are? Like I said, you don't have the heft.

What makes you think you have the right to pose questions or demand answers of me. If you aren't a Christian what's it to you? If you are, you should know. Orishi rishi up in here presenting an ersatz spirituality. If you have nothing cogent to say, here's a spade, feel free to disappear up your own fundament .

I continue to deliver


TV

soonest:
Is this topic about feminism? Are those wanting out because of spousal abuse also feminist.

If I wish to introduce feminism, I am free to do so. Likewise, you are free to ignore or refute . Having said that, nowadays, whether you accept it or not, the feminist narrative is one that usually colours discussions of this nature. I actually made that point, likening it to how the right to abortion willfully murder ones unborn child is presented. Is that clear? It's about the narrative, not any individual.

soonest:
@ the bolded, ain't you trying to be smart? You know the abuse being discussed in this thread is physical abuse so I don't get where this is coming from. Except you are unto something else.

Me, trying to be smart . Fightin' talk - Me likey .

Physical abuse? Nope, the OP started by mentioning abuse - without any qualification - and cited it as a reason for divorce. He went further to categorise 4 - also alluding to a number of other - types of abuse. Next time please come along with your reading glasses and comprehension smarts .


TV

Sparklequeen:
what of domestic abuse? and if someone doesn't have money to file for a divorce, what is her Fate or another option?

If abuse - as opposed to low level conflict - occurs in a marriage, spouses should seek immediate resolution. Even low level conflict should not be a feature of a healthy marriage, let alone a christian one. Love & submission. How hard is that ?

If abuse is escalating or serious, endangered party should seek to remove themselves from the situation, seek the right help, and if necessary remain separated for their well-being, until such time as the situation is resolved.

Divorce does not save one from abuse, it can take years to process a divorce. Lots of domestic, indeed more domestic abuse occurs between "unmarried couples". Domestic abuse is not an inherent feature of marriage.

If after all efforts a resolution to effect reconciliation cannot be found, you can remain separated, but you cannot remarry. Christian marriage is until death do part. Any subsequent "union" whilst the spouse is still alive is adultery.

I know huh? Shine eye, look well, choose wisely and enter the institution with the requisite sobriety. Christianity is not for flakes, marriage is not for the faint-hearted.


TV

dominique:
Nothing or no one can ever break the bond between mother and child. Your wife can never love you more than her child, sorry about that

...and this is an endorsement for marrying single mothers

So what reasonable man will not hesitate before marrying a woman who loves her child - by another man - more than him? Another reason why single mothers are avoided is because they are usually looking for provision and protection for their child/ren first and a husband second.

It makes all the difference if the child in question is actually yours. Her love and your efforts are going on your child, not someone elses.

People are free to make their own decisions, but ATBE there is greater risk. Simples. If you can live with it and deal with any fallout, by all means.

Does anyone even talk about marrying virgins any more ?


TV

RiloKiley:
Whether married or not, there are always other options to violence. But these situations occur at a time of great anger and irrationality, especially when the man has been provoked and pushed to the wall.


All men have the potential to beat up a woman. Self control is key. However we are human and self control cannot be maintained 100% of the time especially if the man is being continually provoked.

The one-off slapper is usually stunned when he does it. The one off slap usually ends the quarrel with both partners being shocked and surprised at the same time. It happens and is usually unplanned.

The chronic abuser however would have been rendering slaps even in the pre-marriage era. It is part of his/her repertoire and such people usually defend their slaps as a means to an end. They give out their fists generously. These are the husband/wife beaters. These are the ones whose spouses are at risk of losing thier lives.

Some much needed nuance to this discussion. But I doubt it will be appreciated. The feminist hordes and their ideologically transgenderd enablers are after divorce at will.

No-fault divorce is already here legally, they are just trying to force the message home socially, and ensure it's embedded into all belief systems. Like abortion really.

Abortion was in case of rape or threat to the mothers life. These two reasons account for an almost negligible number of abortions, and the real push is for abortion on demand - at any point and for any reason.

Here they cite cases of serious physical abuse or death as examples, then make abuse itself the justifier, abuse without any real or objective definition - i.e. based on what the woman feels.

Soon, if you can't afford a walk in wardrobe full of designer bags for your wife, abuse will be cited and divorce justified . Poor men, you are on your own .


TV

missjo:
You quote the Bible a lot for someone who likes to bully, insult, and talk down on women,is this the Christian way?

Love the bible me. Untrammelled - and often unpalatable - truth . And please, I'm an equal opportunity bully, insulter and talk down-oner" .

Can't rightly tell if you are after a discussion, fight or just looking to score cheap points. Any which way, I can't say I really give a toss, you haven't shown you possess the heft.


TV

Is it too difficult to parse situations with objectivity? The core question should be; is single parenthood a good thing?

We are all touched and grateful for seemingly heart-warming stories such as this one. But for every one we can give thanks for, there are a hundred that left poorer outcomes for both the parent and child/ren involved. Is it overly difficult to separate the personal from policy?

All the data is already in, single parenthood (and I refer mainly to wilful single-parenthood, not widowhood or rape, which in any event are a relative minority) underpins many social pathologies.

It’s a major indicator of poverty, high-profile celebrity instances non-withstanding. It more likely to lead to issues for the children, especially as they approach their teenage years.

Males being more likely to be delinquent, and females being more likely to be promiscuous, are two of the most well known outcomes. Search data for the presence of fathers in the lives of prison inmates.

But there are numerous others, inter-alia, feelings of abandonment, self-worth/esteem issues, developmental and socialisation issues, poorer academic achievement, etc.

And yes, for your average person it has to have a potential impact on future relationships; from the financial burden, babymama/dada issues, all around acceptance etc.

The stigma surrounding single-parenthood may hurt, but at the societal level it is a protective mechanism, not intended to be wilfully malicious to individuals. There is a net cost, which society bears. It’s why families tread warily.

Who grows up dreaming of being or marrying a single parent. And yes, women bear the brunt here, so it behoves them to act more circumspectly and, make wiser choices, as opposed to unthinking indignation and the push for its acceptance which seems to prevail here?

Yes single parents should be given all the support possible, everything should be done to ameliorate the situation, especially to ensure positive outcomes for the child/ren. But no, single parenthood should not be sold as an attractive alternative to intact biological families, or even, as it seems to be today, preferable, even aspirational

And in the rush to herald this, the intimacy at 11 seems to have gone singularly unremarked upon


TV

thesicilian:
Marital infidelity is sexual immorality/unfaithfulness in marriage. And I think its the only ground for divorce recognized by Jesus Christ while he was physically on earth.

But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless
she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit
adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced
woman also commits adultery.
- Matthew 5:32 (New Living Translation)

This may appear to be the case at first glance, but look at parallel scriptures;

Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Mark 10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.

Luke 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

If these verses in Mark & Luke are to be believed - and they are - divorcing a woman and remarrying makes one an adulterer. Along with the divorced spouse if they should marry another.

Luke and Mark seemingly contradict Matthew 5:32 & 19:9, or at least says that even if you divorce your wife for infidelity, you cannot remarry, and neither can she. So again;

Matthew 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Matthew 1:18-19 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

The seeming exception in Matthew was due to what we see in chapter 1. Joseph was espoused (betrothed to Mary), it was not a consummated marriage, even though he was called her husband - "before they came together" - it's why paternity was not in question - for ordinary Joe anyway .

He was putting away a fiancee, not a wife. Both parts of the transaction were considered binding, but voiding could occur at the betrothal stage (prior to consummation) if "fornication", note it was not "adultery", was proven. They were considered husband and wife at both stages.

In todays terms we say better a broken engagement. There was no concept of dating or loosely engaged. Biblically, after consummation, marriage is until death do part - hence this saying by the disciples;

Matthew 19:10 - His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

That's bible, it can be hard,, so take it or leave it. But please stop trying to interject worldly morés to make it more palatable to those who cannot receive it .


TV
^{...Olaadegbu, please stop prating about divorce for abuse - it's not there.}

OLAADEGBU:
Does an abused wife have to stay with her husband?

OLAADEGBU:
There is emotional abuse, physical abuse, financial abuse, spiritual abuse and so on.

OLAADEGBU:
Emotional abuse in often underrated. It is sometimes worse than physical abuse.

Timbuktou:
Do you think it would be ok for a man to divorce Jo's wife over emotional abuse?

OLAADEGBU:
No.

Timbuktou:
But you do for physical abuse. I mean, we do know emotional abuse could well lead to HBP and ultimately. So, you're against violent deaths but not quieter ones? After all, HBP has been referred to as the silent killer.

See logic fail – Emotional abuse (usually by women) is as bad as physical abuse (usually by men), but women are allowed to divorce for physical abuse(contrary to scripture), but men are not.

See policy fail – divorce is permissable for abuse (of which there are numerous types), but at what level of abuse (for individual categories or universally) is not clear? Is it subjective, or is there an objective measure?

Olaadegbu are you a feminist - your shoddy logic & ill-formulated policy would suggest so


TV

OLAADEGBU:
It is easy to identify serial abusers.

Chapter and verse please - or find your level


TV

OLAADEGBU:
You seem to bask in the fact that the Bible does not allow for divorce hence you think that an abusive relationship is permissible.

Are you irretrievably dull ? What you wrote up there is akin to saying "my bank doesn't allow overdrafts, therefore it's ok to steal" . Let me ask you - does the bible permit or condone abuse?

OLAADEGBU:
What should happen where there is no reconciliation, remorse or healing?

You persist. If you desist, you remain happy to be separated - their is no divorce, and separation (and even if you forcefully claim divorce), does not grant one leave to re-marry. Else both the remarrying spouse and the person they enter into a sham union with are committing adultery . All simple and clear from the scriptures .

OLAADEGBU:
Do people deliberately get into abusive marriages? How do they prevent getting into abusive marriages?

Refer to your BIBLE - Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth (and while one is still on it) . There are no abusive marriages, only abusive people . Don't marry them and your marriage won't be abusive. Learner .

OLAADEGBU:
Where did I say that I am campaigning for divorce? It is you that I should be accusing of condoning abuse.

Not only are you campaigning for Christian divorce, you are also blaspheming and adding/subtracting from the scriptures.

You are arguing that divorce is scripturally permmisable. If divorce is permmisable, then serial divorce is permmisable. If divorce is allowed then the scripture is broken

1 Corinthians 7:39 - A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes...

Romans 7 - 1 Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2 For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3 So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.


Your audience are the cohort of divorcees and people with "bend down and pick spouses". They are here talking about how the bible can be interpreted in "different ways" - as if covetousness, theft, lies and adultery are ambiguous .

OLAADEGBU:
There is emotional abuse, physical abuse, financial abuse, spiritual abuse and so on. If the abusive spouse refuses that the abused be separated what should they do, remain?

You have categorised 4+ types of abuse - at what degree of abuse is divorce scriptural for each (and any other you care to mention) category. Who decides how much? Is it subjective, or is there some objective rule?

We are not in deep waters yet and you already appear to be panicking . Well, at least you'll have big audiences of seeker type religionists who live to have their feelings tickled and wicked ways validated. Awon oni "itching ears"


TV

OLAADEGBU:
Would separation not be better than losing your life? What's the use of living with a murderer at the expense of your marriage?

...ah! Sophistry, key tool of blasphemers and divorce campaigners . My first response to you on this thread; https://www.nairaland.com/3362781/abuse-acceptable-reason-divorce#49552647 - only now you want to twist "separate" to mean "divorce" right . Separate means just that, not divorcdeor dissolution of the union.The bible says marriage is for life. if you can find anything contrary, please share, or explicit reference to dissolution for "abuse", likewise .

OLAADEGBU:
I asked you the question. It is not a crime to say 'I do not know.'

More sleight of hand; I asked you to buttress your own question, below, with scriptural references - I know the answer

OLAADEGBU:
Is there any biblical reason for Christian couples to file for divorce when there is the possibility of 'becoming brutalised or ending up dead'?

...and following, is there any Chriistian writ to marry or conduct marriage with abuse as a subtext ?


TV

RiloKiley:
Good job, my dear fellow. Good job.

Gracias sir..seems he's back for more .


TV

OLAADEGBU:
Abuse is abuse there is no use embellishing it.

Did you know most marriages do fine and deliver even with low levels of conflict - I would term that abuse - should we end them all?

OLAADEGBU:
All types of abuse is wrong and should not be condoned. It is against the law of the land, especially in developed countries.

No one said it's right, or should be condoned. The bible just says it's not grounds for divorce, and forgiveness, healing and reconciliation should be the initial recourse. Or are forgiveness, healing and reconciliatrion against the law .

OLAADEGBU:
No one should remain in an abusive relationship. It's either they do something about it or separate for good.

Don't get into a potentially abusive marriage, and if the signs appear, nip them in the bud. If it happens seek remedies quickly. If you choose separation, fine, it does not mean divorce, or pre-suppose re-marriage without one spouse passing away . Beautifully simply biblical truth .

OLAADEGBU:
Whatever age or religion you belong to there is no excuse for an abusive relationship. The fact that it is allowed in your religion or culture does not make it right. It is against the law of the land which makes it a civil offence and this should be reported to the necessary authorities wherever it occurs before it becomes too late.

This is not about abuse is it. You wiley ole' divorce campaigner you .


TV

Joavid:
yea. virgins can't get pregnant. and to have kids, you gotta have sex.

...typically before kids, a relationship of sorts is formed. And hopefully it will result in marriage and kids. Married parents in an intact biological family is still the best way to raise kids ATBE - hence why governments encourage it.


TV