Over three years and my heart still agonized over my divorce 😔. I’ve tried in prayer so hard and at times it almost happened. But she moved out of state recently for a very high paying job and even placed me in the dreaded friend zone. I remember the woman at the well who was married 5 times. I remember that those who are forgiven much love much. I remember Jacob’s continuing struggle with sin. I have such a hard time reconciling this in my heart when we were so close to restoration. Lord forgive us and forgive her. Have mercy on us both. Lest we should parish. May your will be done. Maranatha

No, blasphemy against the holy spirit is the unforgivable sin

Great word, teaching, counceling, people need study, show selves approved unto God, workman who needs not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. Need learn repentance means to change ones mind from being without Christ to accepting Him into their lives To become that new creature, new creation by the Spirit + Word of Father God!

Its remarriage while your spouse is still living that's the real Adulterous sin . The problem with this type of sin is that to be forgiven, one has to repent(remorse) and forsake sin. With regard to divorce, The Bible recommends a separation for a while if it becomes impossible to live with an unbeliever. The hope is always that you will be united again and through your life the unbelieving spouse might become a believer. This idea that we can remarry while our spouse is living is a modern day invention not found in the NT. God Bless

I agree with the conclusion but its easier to support the other view biblically and Andrew didn't do much via references to support his view.

divorce happens but it is what happens after. remarriage compounds the negative consequences of the divorce. if a woman divorces remain single or reconcile; do not marry a divorced person

Wonderfully spoken Andrew! May God Bless You for Your Good Work!

I have never properly understood this from a christian point of view.thank you Mr farley

Isn’t unbelief the unpardonable sin? I mean it makes sense. God can’t simply forgive you from not believing in/on Jesus........

When you remarry you are under sin every day unless your 1st husband dies

This is still wrong; If you abandon your spouse and refuse to reconcile; then you have unrepentant sin; it's only unforgivable if you won't reconcile. Romans 1:31 KJV ; Covenant breakers are worthy of death.

Thank you Sir!!!! Good Expl...

Wow, on point brother! Good word. Balanced.

Practical living advice: Get a divorce only if your spouse committed adultery (can forgive but the marriage is still broken). Get a separation agreement and stay single if your spouse is abusive or abandons you. If you separate from your spouse and they become one with someone else, then change your separation into a divorce and you can get remarried. This is consistent with God's view of marriage and is consistent with God's view of repentance because it allows the abusive or abandoning spouse to repent and reconcile if they had not yet committed adultery.

Thank you for your channel and your thoughts. I got divorced because my ex wife cheated on me three years ago. We never had children. We were both over it when she left, so the divorce was easy. I am almost 40 and still hope I will have a family some day; however even though my situation fits the exception, there are still some who say I cannot remarry. My current thinking on this is: God knew that it might not be good to never allow for divorce, but he also knew that if he spelled it out too clearly that that would be taken advantage of. The end result is that anyone who comes to faith and is concerned about it, will be extremely careful in their future decisions, and maybe that's the best possible answer. Which means to me I will never have a truly solid answer on whether it is right or wrong as a given rule like a commandment. And God in his wisdom does not want me to have such an answer, because then I would take decisions I make in this area of my life less seriously. So I'm just leaving it up to him. I am not seeking a second marriage, instead I am seeking God only. But I can't seem to completely let go of that hope for a wife and a family.

The divorce and remarriage for adultery doctrine is based solely on the supposed guilt of the wife in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. However, the wife, in the above scriptures, is clearly not guilty of fornication because the Jews (that Jesus was speaking to) were still living under the law, and if fornication was discovered, there was a moral obligation to report the offender according to Deuteronomy 22:13-24. The wife, who would have been found guilty of fornication, was subsequently stoned to death, according to the law, which had still governed the Jews up until Christ's death on the cross. The same for a woman caught in adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10. How could a wife, guilty of fornication, or adultery, under the law of Moses, be given a writing of divorcement and be caused to commit adultery with whosoever marries her, that is divorced? Jesus is clear, in these examples, that the wife is not guilty of fornication, but is still caused to commit adultery if she marries another man now that she is divorced. This is the only way that Matthew 5:31-32, and Matthew 19:9 keep harmony with Romans 7:2-3, and 1 Corinthians 7:39. Unlike the synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, which were written to evangelize the Gentiles, Matthew was written to the Jews, and has of 24 characteristics that identify it as intended for the house of Israel. The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death. The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. Christ's death on the cross caused the Jews to become dead to the law of Moses, so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the ordinances of law of Moses as justification, over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the ordinances of the law is no longer possible, for Israel, and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15. Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife. Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned, by an unbelieving spouse, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way some translations word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not enslaved" which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, which is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 shows the Apostle Paul giving those who are abandoned permission to remarry, do not understand the command that Christ gives is to an abandoned husband, in 1 Corinthians 7:11, and that he "must not divorce" his wife, and his wife is commanded to "remain unmarried or else be reconciled" to her husband. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh, due to one's unbelief, puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, and himself, by implying that Paul has issued an opposing command to verses 10-14 in verse 15. Some also teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16. The Jewish couples in ancient Israel, who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death, either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with verses 25-26 speaking exclusively to men that have never married. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly in regard to virgin women who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is speaking of a virgin who has become of age to bear children when it says, "let them marry." This is a clear command, to a single man, who has taken a virgin to be his wife. Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring again to the single man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged), under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which again means single men, in the congregation, who have betrothed a wife, do well if they marry, and those who choose not to marry their virgin brides do better, under the current climate. For more proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unscriptural unions. The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24. Mark 10:1-12 and Matthew 19:1-12 both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans, and likewise Luke to evangelize the Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching. Please use wisdom when living in any situation against what the scriptures command.

Is eating to many big macs the impardable sin

God died for our sins so we could repent and stop sinning.... Grace is given once we leave our sinful lifestyles. You cannot expect to be forgiven and still continue to sin all you want. That's the impression you're giving me. If I were you I would re read the bible instead of mis leading pple.

Yes, if you refuse to reconcile your covenants. YOU"RE NOT TO DIVORCE AT ALL!!!

Andrew Farly.. You keep on saying on this or any other video that we are under grace and not under the law. Yes we are not under the law but on the law of Moses only.We have been forgiven by the Father from all our inquity through the death of Christ on the cross.We are under grace yes of course but it doesnt mean that there is no law anymore becuase we are not under the law of Moses but under the law of Christ to establish the law of the Spirit. Christ came for a better law under His authority through the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The early Christian churches have their laws but not under the law of Moses but under the law or commandments of Christ through the Holy Spirit. This early churches will not be built if there is no Christ command in His ministry before and after He seated at the right hand of the Father and at this present age.

Unrepentant sin is not pardonable.

I would have liked to comment on the thing you did about willingness to sin when talking of homosexuality, I am a Buddhist not of your faith or belief system however I respect everyone’s right to belief and religion. I personally have an issue with the argument that gays are willingly sinning, I love my boyfriend and feel extremely happy to be his. Willingness to sin would be partaking in sin while being consciously aware, I do not wake up every morning thinking of how I can sin or make your god mad. I barely even think about being gay, it’s just who I am.

I don’t at all intend to just sound mean here... and I’ll start by attesting that as a believer I have endured many years of my life wrestling with the agonizing and horrifying thought that I’d committed that sin, and I’ve now been set at peace about it. But... I honestly just struggle t see how anyone can apply this interpretation to it. I’ve seen this question before and it honestly seems like it should be pretty hard to interpret the passages about it as alluding to anything about divorce. If you’re fearing that you’ve committed this sin, first I doubt you have, because you care. My best interpretation of it is that the blaspheme of the Spirit is represented by such an outrageous, outspoken, vehement blackballing and rejection of the Truth of Christ... AS the actual Holy Spirit is ministering this truth to you and knocking on the door of your heart... something like that. It’s not any one thing you say or do, and it has nothing to do with what you’ve done to with other mere men.

5:42 FALSE PREACHER ALERT Be you therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Matthew 5,48

Divorce can be unforgivable if someone is not following the commandments of the Holy Spirit as the commandments of Christ and in the New Testament churches.

Don't watch that other man's program.

There's a lot of unnecessary confusion about divorce. Divorce is only a state issued certificate allowing someone to re-marry. It is not a sin by itself. Divorce for adultery is fine and is not sin. Divorce for any other reason is bad because it can lead to adultery. Divorce and separation are essentially the same with the former being potentially more problematic because of the "perceived" permission to remarry.(ie cause someone to commit adultery).

Sir was it good to merry a Devorced women from her unbeliever spouse...

Under the law we are bound to remain married unless adultery was the cause ,none the less it's a hard heart that brings one to divorce. Under grace we are not under the bondage of the law of marriage . If a unbelieving wife or husband chooses to leave we are not obligated to remain married . God hates Divorce too be sure.

👑❤️