<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Basically proper conclusions...
Review: ...but brought about in a strange way which in and of itself is not accurate. The book is written with a strangish form of Ideal Absolutism, which is the ethical theory which speakes of taking part of the lesser evil, although sin still occurs when that is followed. Lovett calls this the "Toleration Principal." I call this book strangish for several reasons. First, Lovett has in several places made some very strange use of hermeneutics. For example, Lovett claims that what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 5:31-32, 19:3-12, Mark 10:2-12 and Luke 16:18 is that when a couple's heart is no longer in the marriage, they are now living in a state of spiritual adultery, because they have been spiritually divorced. This is very strange indeed, because although the author does not admit it, this could be used to justify any divorce at all and this is CLEARLY not what Jesus was saying in the above passages. Also, he takes the viewpoint that what Jesus was talking about when he said [except for porneia] that he was referring to sexual unfaithfulness during the betrothal period, which is a minority view. Most people on many different sides of the debate agree that Jesus was referring to adultry when he said 'porneia.' Another clear mistake in the book is that the author claims that Paul "...never once mentions divorce. He doesn't discuss it anyplace" (p.73). Whatever Lovett may think, this simply isn't true. In I Corinthians 7:10-11, Paul uses the words choristhenai and aphienai translated 'depart' and 'put away' respectively, in the King James Version, which is what Lovett is working with. These are actually technical terms for the Greco-Roman Divorce by seperation, which was a groundless divorce in which one of the partners would simply walk out of the house which the other partner owned, or the owner would 'put away' or 'send out' the partner who didn't own the house. In the ancient world, this completed the divorce proceedings. The point is though, that Paul DOES mention divorce, and he preaches strongly against GROUNDLESS divorce, while elsewhere in the chapter affirming the biblical grounds for divorce, which include physical and emotional neglect and/or abuse (I Corinthians 7:3-5, 33-34, stemming from Exodus 21:10-11). Despite these problems, Lovett does demonstrate at least a fairly good understanding of some of the other issues surrounding the actual issue of divorce and remarriage. His basic conclusion is that if a marriage has become more harmful then helpful, spiritual divorce has already taken place and legal divorce should also take place. As to remarriage, he says that "...where a remarriage was clearly in the interest of Jesus, Paul would be the first to give his blessing" (p. 79). So why did I give this book four stars despite all my negative critique? It's because although I don't agree with how he reaches his conclusions, and I don't agree that divorce is always sinful, I do agree that a marriage which is fiercly abusive, full of neglect, and/or full of unfaithfulness warrants the innocent party the option of divorcing, and later remarrying. This is warranted because the breaking of the marriage vows sunders the covenant. Jesus never denies this, nor does Paul. For a much fuller understanding of this complex issue, see Dr. David Instone-Brewer's book "Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Context" (Eerdmans, 2002) or his much shorter version of the same material called "Divorce and Remarriage in the Church: Biblical Solutions for Pastoral Reality" (Paternoster, 2003) available at Amazon.co.uk.
Rating:
Summary: Basically proper conclusions...
Review: ...but brought about in a strange way which in and of itself is not accurate. The book is written with a strangish form of Ideal Absolutism, which is the ethical theory which speakes of taking part of the lesser evil, although sin still occurs when that is followed. Lovett calls this the "Toleration Principal." I call this book strangish for several reasons. First, Lovett has in several places made some very strange use of hermeneutics. For example, Lovett claims that what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 5:31-32, 19:3-12, Mark 10:2-12 and Luke 16:18 is that when a couple's heart is no longer in the marriage, they are now living in a state of spiritual adultery, because they have been spiritually divorced. This is very strange indeed, because although the author does not admit it, this could be used to justify any divorce at all and this is CLEARLY not what Jesus was saying in the above passages. Also, he takes the viewpoint that what Jesus was talking about when he said [except for porneia] that he was referring to sexual unfaithfulness during the betrothal period, which is a minority view. Most people on many different sides of the debate agree that Jesus was referring to adultry when he said 'porneia.' Another clear mistake in the book is that the author claims that Paul "...never once mentions divorce. He doesn't discuss it anyplace" (p.73). Whatever Lovett may think, this simply isn't true. In I Corinthians 7:10-11, Paul uses the words choristhenai and aphienai translated 'depart' and 'put away' respectively, in the King James Version, which is what Lovett is working with. These are actually technical terms for the Greco-Roman Divorce by seperation, which was a groundless divorce in which one of the partners would simply walk out of the house which the other partner owned, or the owner would 'put away' or 'send out' the partner who didn't own the house. In the ancient world, this completed the divorce proceedings. The point is though, that Paul DOES mention divorce, and he preaches strongly against GROUNDLESS divorce, while elsewhere in the chapter affirming the biblical grounds for divorce, which include physical and emotional neglect and/or abuse (I Corinthians 7:3-5, 33-34, stemming from Exodus 21:10-11). Despite these problems, Lovett does demonstrate at least a fairly good understanding of some of the other issues surrounding the actual issue of divorce and remarriage. His basic conclusion is that if a marriage has become more harmful then helpful, spiritual divorce has already taken place and legal divorce should also take place. As to remarriage, he says that "...where a remarriage was clearly in the interest of Jesus, Paul would be the first to give his blessing" (p. 79). So why did I give this book four stars despite all my negative critique? It's because although I don't agree with how he reaches his conclusions, and I don't agree that divorce is always sinful, I do agree that a marriage which is fiercly abusive, full of neglect, and/or full of unfaithfulness warrants the innocent party the option of divorcing, and later remarrying. This is warranted because the breaking of the marriage vows sunders the covenant. Jesus never denies this, nor does Paul. For a much fuller understanding of this complex issue, see Dr. David Instone-Brewer's book "Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Context" (Eerdmans, 2002) or his much shorter version of the same material called "Divorce and Remarriage in the Church: Biblical Solutions for Pastoral Reality" (Paternoster, 2003) available at Amazon.co.uk.
Rating: 
Summary: Most complete logical view I have ever read on divorce
Review: This book is the best book I have ever read on divorce. The author does not take sides, only explains the views that God wants us to understand; "The state of the heart". The basic premise of this book is founded on the principle that "God is willing to tolerate an evil (divorce in this case) if it prevents his law from producing a greater evil". Since God knows the state of your heart you may be divorced already. Read this book to get a better understanding of mans view on divorce, Gods view on the state of the heart, the tolerance principle and living for the principles of Gods laws not specifically the "Letter of the law".
Rating:
Summary: Most complete logical view I have ever read on divorce
Review: This book is the best book I have ever read on divorce. The author does not take sides, only explains the views that God wants us to understand; "The state of the heart". The basic premise of this book is founded on the principle that "God is willing to tolerate an evil (divorce in this case) if it prevents his law from producing a greater evil". Since God knows the state of your heart you may be divorced already. Read this book to get a better understanding of mans view on divorce, Gods view on the state of the heart, the tolerance principle and living for the principles of Gods laws not specifically the "Letter of the law".
<< 1 >>
| 
