ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Divorce In Process Visits

Are couples still allowed to see each other while their divorce is in the process and waiting for the decision?

Join Our Free Singles and Take The Dating & Marriage Quiz
 ---smurf2011 on 9/1/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (4)

Post a New Blog



--Tray 9/26/11
You can say whatever you want, but you clearly crossed a line on 9/21, 9/22, and again on 9/23, in each of which proved your own malicious and evil intent. To keep repeating it shows the strength it has over you. Until you apologize and repent of your malicious and evil actions, you cannot walk in truth and light. I know it might be hard to humble the arrogance with which you speak, and to love rather than revile others, but it is what God commands of all of us. You can parrot all the scripture you want, but it doesn't prove you correct as you imply and condemns your acts when you act with malicious and evil intent.
---Rocky on 9/27/11


Trav:
Romans 1 is all about the fate of those who turn their back on God.
Four of these are strife, malice, slander, and arrogance. We appear to have plenty of all four of these on these blogs. What does that say about us?
---StrongAxe on 9/26/11


It says plenty. Glad you pointed it out.
Ones who put their faith & trust, hope & vote defending their little god, the poser. Layer caked with a little harry potter, hinduism etc, instead of the ONE GOD.
Leaning to all of these scriptures.
Boy is confused and defensive now, defending the indefensible. I almost know this guy.
Political teenage me in the 70's. The logic? There were many ecumenical/open paths. My own way. ha.
---Trav on 9/27/11


Isa.5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, good evil, that put darkness for light, light for darkness, that put
---Trav on 9/26/11
The scripture you cite only condemns your words, your malicious attacks, in your successive posts on 9/21, 9/22, 9/23. You still have not repented of your malicious, evil intent and thus continue in darkness, speaking and repeating lies and darkness. I have no need to prove you wrong, God knows and judges you. And this is not a doctrinal dispute, your words prove that you lied and wrongly reviled. Even your new post repeats some lies.
---Rocky on 9/26/11


Trav:

Romans 1 is all about the fate of those who turn their back on God. Note particularly verses 29-30 that describe many of the vile things such people end up doing. Four of these are strife, malice, slander, and arrogance. We appear to have plenty of all four of these on these blogs. What does that say about us?
---StrongAxe on 9/26/11


Apologize and repent. Cease to do evil and learn to do good.
---Rocky on 9/26/11

I'm sorry...you appear this way 2 me. I repent that my hand picked scripture cannot change you.
I'm sorry you are an obominite supporter. Vote Christian, is the good I give you.

//Accused? Stated,this is the way you appear/are to me.//

You uphold, even defend and promote the most prominent supporters of abominations in our time.
Isa.5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, good evil, that put darkness for light, light for darkness, that put
---Trav on 9/26/11




You uphold, even defend and promote the most prominent supporters of abominations in our time... Isa.5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, good evil, that put darkness for light, light for darkness
--Trav_9/26/11
You distort and lie again. I never promoted supporters of abominations and only defended them from wrongful hate speech, as Jesus himself would have done with love, but never promoting false doctrine. Its sad that you can't see the difference. The Isa.5:20 quote applies to you not me. You already proved in earlier posts, (9/21, 9/22, and 9/23) your malicious, evil intent and that you speak from darkness not light. You obviously are not repentant but continue in darkness, speaking more lies and trying to deceive others.
---Rocky on 9/26/11


Need to prove false first. By your own mouth it is not false.
--Trav 9/28
You are saying anyone you choose to attack is guilty by your word until they prove themselves innocent. More lies and deceit. More proof you dont walk in the light. Your 3 separate posts reviling me for being effeminate, with not one thing written by me to justify your abusive attack, proves you very wrong, a sinner with no truth or light but malicious, evil intent. And your new words prove you have not repented of your evil and continue in darkness. Apologize, repent and stop spreading lies. You're the messenger of lies and darkness not of God, proved by your own words.
---Rocky on 9/26/11


Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
--Trav 9/26/11
Yes , Trav,, but you speak of yourself. You somehow think that if you quote the words of God that speak about evil in general, that it somehow proves you right and the other wrong. You do it in post after post. How foolish. All it proves is that you are trying to be deceitful and misapply Gods words. And you do it in almost every post. Instead you only prove your own arrogance. By falsely reviling others your proved that you walk in darkness and speak not the truth. Apologize and repent. Cease to do evil and learn to do good.
---Rocky on 9/26/11


How foolish it is to think he is a messenger of God when he walks in darkness instead of the light and does not repent of his evil actions.
---Rocky on 9/26/11

Accused? Stated,this is the way you appear/are to me. You've done nothing yet in the "light" to convince otherwise, including deny.

You uphold, even defend and promote the most prominent supporters of abominations in our time.
My post with with scriptural witnesses probably not for you...as per you. Scripturally are for Sheep.
I'm no messenger, admit easily. GOD's unified scriptures are.
Isa.5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, good evil, that put darkness for light, light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet,sweet for bitter!
---Trav on 9/26/11


however if one feels "condemned" by OT quotes they are CONDEMNED by GOD Trav would simply be the messenger
--Rhonda 9/24/11
Unless one knows that they are being falsely reviled by Trav and he is misusing God's words to falsely accuse another. And when he does it repeatedly, he proves not only is he being a reviler and will not inherit the kingdom of God, but that he is the one breaking God's commandments. How foolish it is to think he is a messenger of God when he walks in darkness instead of the light and does not repent of his evil actions.
---Rocky on 9/26/11




I recognize that by repeatedly and falsely reviling another as effeminate you proved your evil motivation ....
---Rocky on 9/25/11

Need to prove false first. By your own mouth it is not false.
Appears light of scripture is on you.

You defend the indefensible,the abominable and want me to repent pointing it out.
Not in this life or the next.
Acts 20:30
Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
---Trav on 9/26/11


Recognizing I'm blunt, and don't apologize in most cases. It was through provocation that Truth was pointed out to me.
--Trav on 9/25/11
I recognize that by repeatedly and falsely reviling another as effeminate you proved your evil motivation and that you do not walk in the Spirit, you have not repented, and you have no light.
1Co_6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
---Rocky on 9/25/11


\\GOD reviles effeminates,as we all do.
1 Cor 6:9
--trav 9/21/11\\

The Greek word that the KJV renders as "effeminate", MALAKOS, is used by Jesus Himself to refer to St. John the Baptist.

"What did you go out to see? A man wearing MALAKOS clothing? Behold, those who wear MALAKOS clothing are in king's palaces."

Clearly "effeminate" is a mistransllation, especially since in ancient versions, such as the Slavonic, the word is merely transliterated, and not translated in 1 Cor 6:9.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/25/11


...however if one feels "condemned" by OT quotes they are CONDEMNED by GOD Trav would simply be the messenger

btw THANK YOU Trav for being one of few who respond by WORD not emotion I learn much from your posts
---Rhonda on 9/24/11

Thanks Rhonda, if just one, finds their own questions, answered....substantiated, by GOD's hand picked Prophets, Apostles and Christ. Then my heart sings. Truth confirmed witnesses is freedom from men.
Recognizing I'm blunt, and don't apologize in most cases. It was through provocation that Truth was pointed out to me.
If it's a snake, i cannot call it a lamb.
Heb 2:(17)18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
---Trav on 9/25/11


strongax, I stated as truth: "could it be that if we looked up the word "lost" in the dictionary, the first definition listed would be 1. cluny." Then cluny asked, "So how do you know?" So I answered, "public education." Is this fundamental train of thought too complex for you to follow? Surely you understand basic discourse between two people. To elucidate this simple reply for you, children in elementary school know what the definition of the word "lost" is even without looking up the common word in a dictionary.
---Eloy on 9/25/11


Trav:

You said: Christ used the words, viper,dog,fox etc. and Effem's are not allowed in.

Jesus called Pharisees vipers, and Herod a fox - both hypocrites. He also called Peter "Satan" once.

He only mentioned dogs twice. Once was to the Woman at the Well (i.e. the children's bread should not be cast to the dogs, and when she said that dogs at children's scraps, he praised her for her great faith). The other time was to not give what is holy to dogs, nor cast pearls before swine. In neither case did he call anyone specific a dog or swine.

But he never reviled common sinners like adulterers, murderers, prostitutes, extortionists, etc. He also never once spoke about "effeminates".
---StrongAxe on 9/25/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


trav apologising? hmm, the end of the world first
---andy3996 on 9/25/11


GOD reviles effeminates,as we all do.
1 Cor 6:9
--trav 9/21/11
Christ used the words, viper,dog,fox etc
Effem's are not allowed in.
--Trave 9/22/11
Perhaps he leans to the double y.
--Trav 9/23/23
Your personal insults prove your evil motivations and only condemn yourself. To bring up a totally irrelevant personal attack like this also proves you have some deviant fixation with the issue. You need to get your mind right, apologize, repent, and discontinue your malicious, deviant attacks. You are not walking in the Spirit, but have given yourself over to evil intent.
---Rocky on 9/24/11


\\ and if you do not know that the definition od lost describes youself to a "T",\\

If you think I'm lost, that means I'm safe in the arms of Jesus.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/24/11


Eloy:

Yes. You said "public education" as a sentence, with no context, not saying just what you meant about it, or whether you approved or disapproved - so it's not clear (at least to me) what you meant by that.

From your posts in the past, it seems that you are generally not in favor of ideas that are held commonly, since many of your ideas contradict views held by 90%+ of others, and you say that you are right and they are wrong in those areas.
---StrongAxe on 9/24/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


Trav, is different, he answers with sarcastic remarks, but he does not condemn you to hell right out, what he does is he responds by finding O.T. passages to condemn you. He claims everyone needs two witnesses. He always find them in the Old Testament.
*****

Trave didn't write the OT so it is BEYOND absurd to become so emotionally distraught in a belief that Trav personally condemns ANYONE by quoting OT

however if one feels "condemned" by OT quotes they are CONDEMNED by GOD Trav would simply be the messenger

btw THANK YOU Trav for being one of few who respond by WORD not emotion I learn much from your posts
---Rhonda on 9/24/11


strongax, you ask of me the definition of my post?
---Eloy on 9/24/11


Oops. That was me that wrote a post below and not Jed.
---Rocky on 9/24/11


Rocky, you say that scripture does not anger you. It is the people who suggest that all scripture should be believed and followed that do anger you.
---Jed on 9/23/11
Wrong again. You don't have the slightest idea if, or when, I am angry let alone what, if anything, makes me angry. Why do you choose to continue saying such stupid things about subjects you obviously know nothing about?
---Jed on 9/23/11


Shop For Church Seating


Trav, is different,...
He wants you to provide two witnesses to prove what Jesus said was true.
---Mark_V. on 9/23/11

Ha. Too prove what you say is not false. U require proof....you can't give it.

Always in the Old Covenant Testament? We'll test that again.

Christ fulfilled all in the Old. They are witnessed in the New.

Sister,you think you've hidden Israels lost slipper? GOD divorced this queen/wife, said he would remarry her. And made a way,not breaking his own marriage law.
I will be happy (amazed) just to be invited to the wedding.

Teaching against OT prophets chosen to establish him, is a warning, lesson for someone else perhaps? Since you reject them.
---Trav on 9/23/11


Most were replaced and we are commanded to love all.

Pathetic.
---Rocky on 9/23/11

Jed, he may love all...literally. Having evaded some noteworthy corners.

The disciples knew and instituted perimeters that he doesn't understand. Perhaps he leans to the double y.

Matthew 10:14
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
---Trav on 9/23/11


smurf2011, it would be very strange indeed.
---eloy7794 on 9/23/11


Rocky:

Thank you for bringing 1 Corinthians 6:10 to our attention. 9-10 are frequently used to clobber people over the head with one grievous sin or another (i.e. Ten Commandment sins like adultery, theft, covetousness, etc.) but people often overlook the "less important" but equally bad sins of the spirit like reviling - something one sees thrown about on these blogs daily with recklness abandon.
---StrongAxe on 9/23/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


Eloy:

What do you mean by "public education"? Do you mean that whatever is taught in the public schools is true? Or that whatever the majority of people believe is true?
---StrongAxe on 9/23/11


Rocky, you say that scripture does not anger you. It is the people who suggest that all scripture should be believed and followed that do anger you.
---Jed on 9/23/11


Rocky, we have here are two people, Eloy and Trav. Eloy claims sinlessness, everything he says, he wants everyone to believe it is truth, and he can never be wrong. So he condemns you to hell. Coming from someone who claims been born again twice. From the beginning you know how wrong he is, for no one but Christ is sinless. But he thinks he is, because he claim before he was the light Jesus saw while on the Cross.
Trav, is different, he answers with sarcastic remarks, but he does not condemn you to hell right out, what he does is he responds by finding O.T. passages to condemn you. He claims everyone needs two witnesses. He always find them in the Old Testament. He wants you to provide two witnesses to prove what Jesus said was true.
---Mark_V. on 9/23/11


cluny, public education. Even a child knows the definition of "lost", and if you do not know that the definition od lost describes youself to a "T", then you are vastly afar off from the truth.
---Eloy on 9/22/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


\\cluny, are you sure? Look again.
---Eloy on 9/20/11\\

You yourself have said you don't use sinful men's sources such as dictionaries or lexica.

So how would YOU know?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/22/11


And another ration of garbage from Trav. I never said I had the right to condemn to death and never did. You lie. You wrote "Scripture says what it says". Duh. I never said otherwise. How stupid. Scripture does not and never angers me as you suggest. Another false implication. Your post disproves none of the accurate points I made in mine but only continues your pattern of spewing forth garbage: distorting what others wrote, falsely attacking it, stating scripture irrelevant to the discussion point, then quoting scripture about righteousness as if it testifies to the accuracy of what you wrote. Very childish and immature.
---Rocky on 9/22/11


So the three scriptures you cite are all to the condemnation of the words you write.
---Rcoky on 9/21/11

Wow, wahta judgement.

We've every right to judge false doctrines, for self avoidance. Don't have the right to condemn to judgement or death, nor have i.
Recognition is revelation not judging. Christ used the words, viper,dog,fox etc.
Point. He hated Esau from the womb. He destroyed Sodom.
Effem's are not allowed in.

Posting facts is pointing to your dangers. Scripture says what is says. Two or more scriptures verify.
If scripture angers you, then you are mad at witnesses of GOD, stoning,(throwing rockies) at anyone that points.
---Trav on 9/22/11


The act/fruit and person/tree are unified.
---Trav on 9/21/11
God judging Esau in the scripture you quoted does no show that you have the power or the right to judge other people. You misapply scripture again, and are wrong again. The other ones you quote, about doing evil and hating false ways, only condemn your error of misapplying the first. So the three scriptures you cite are all to the condemnation of the words you write.
---Rcoky on 9/21/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture


GOD reviles effeminates,as we all do.
1 Cor 6:9
--trav 9/21/11

No he does not. You need to learn to differentiate between the act and the person.
---Rocky on 9/21/11

So that is how you justify. No wonder your unwitnessed opinions are repulsive.
John 3:20
For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Context would be similar to your reviling of truth. Not corrupt doctrines or the bearers of.
Psa 119:104
Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.

Romans 9:13
As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

The act/fruit and person/tree are unified.
---Trav on 9/21/11


GOD reviles effeminates,as we all do.
1 Cor 6:9
--trav 9/21/11
No he does not. You need to learn to differentiate between the act and the person. God may condemn the sin but loves the sinner. And right there in the next verse, 1Cor6:10 states: Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor REVILERS, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
So apparently you claim to be a reviler that will not inherit the kingdom of God. But dont apply your sinful behavior to God.
---Rocky on 9/21/11


Trav says your questioning his post blessed him...

Would you please likewise revile me so I may be blessed? ---Rocky on 9/20/11

I will. GOD reviles effeminates,as we all do.
1 Cor 6:9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind,

He's blessed me and many much. By his own mouth,and giving opportunity for scripture witnesses exposing false unsupported doctrines. Much as you do.
True Sheep, search,ask and honor scriputure supported by witnesses,....
2 Peter 3:3
Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
---Trav on 9/21/11


cluny, are you sure? Look again.
---Eloy on 9/20/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops


andy3996, I too have friends from other denominations but they are not "in your face" with their beliefs either. Some religons are trying to conquer the world. In the end, God is still in control and I am thankful for that. So we know how things will end don't we? satan and his minions will be cast into hell.
---shira3877 on 9/20/11


Shira, you are right that those insulting are ignored by us, ussually when i see certain names i make it a bussiness not to read at all, nevertheless i see that many names come and go and i believe it is because of this in part.
in real life i have friends of all denominations, they know my vieuws and they respect me whilst i respect them. mostly we never agree yet non amongst us have ever used insults in such a unchristian way. we always find that before all we are all human beings living toghether on this small world. PS he used DEMON CRAT not DEMO CRAT.
---andy3996 on 9/20/11


Andy, I got you beat. Trav attacked my "girlie ways" as "offensive to men", I dont "resemble the Lord one bit" and he accused me of being the most heinous of all, "a democrat" (which of course means an adherent of democracy"). I admit I didn't realize that was a sin. You are only "strange children, whose mouth speaketh vanity, and their right hand is the right hand of falsehood". So I am way ahead of you. Not to mention Trav says your questioning his post blessed him, although I didn't see how you reviled and persecuted him for His sake. There must be power in your words that I didn't see. Would you please likewise revile me so I may be blessed?
---Rocky on 9/20/11


...it is this kind that gives christianet a bad name, i wonder why this kind of posts are allowed in spite they destroy the ideas and work of christianet?
---andy3996 on 9/17/11

My moderator,Christ is bigger than yours.
No offense,CN, just....
Psalm 144:11
Rid me, and deliver me from the hand of strange children, whose mouth speaketh vanity, and their right hand is a right hand of falsehood:
Jer 5:31
The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means, and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof?
Matt 5:11
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
---Trav on 9/20/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer


andy3996, the blogs are always under scrutiny by all on christianet. while I consider being called a democrat is cursing me, maybe the blogger is democrat. Nothing wrong with that. The ones on here who insult others is well known by all bloggers and they are mostly ignored.
---shira3877 on 9/17/11


MODERATOR.take action, to insult people has nothing to do with doctrines and truth.
trav 9/10/11
1 IT was uncalled for to call someone demoncrat
2 the question did not involve you.
it is this kind that gives christianet a bad name, i wonder why this kind of posts are allowed in spite they destroy the ideas and work of christianet?
this said i'll prbably be unmembered because of what i said.
---andy3996 on 9/17/11


Smurf, I'm going to break the girly joke of Trav, with, yes, couples can see each other while their divorce is in the process. Why did you ask? Did anyone remove their sight? Why on earth would they not be able to?
Or do you mean they can still have sexual relations?
If that is the question, I don't see why not, maybe having sexual relations will make the one wanting the divorce change their mind. Anything that works.
---Mark_V. on 9/16/11


If the desire to visit each other still exists, then it may mean that you still have sufficient grounds to stay married & divorce process should be discontinued.
---Adetunji on 9/14/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting


Isn't there a moderator that removes posts that violate site standards? Eloy - I am new to this site but already I have seen several posts by you that are very unchristian. ---Rocky on 9/9/11

Wow. You're girlie ways are offensive to men who realize GOD helps them deal with scriptural problems or the heretic. Not men or moderators.
Christ didn't call for moderators,other men or even angels.
You don't resemble my Lord one bit in this regard. Who was a Man.
Using scripture he told the enemies of himself face to face. Be a man.

You are probably a demoncrat too. They always want someone else to protect them from the wordy birdys. Unless it them doing the wordy dirty.
---Trav on 9/10/11


Isn't there a moderator that removes posts that violate site standards? Eloy - I am new to this site but already I have seen several posts by you that are very unchristian. Don't you realize that such posts cast a shadow over your credibility and everthing you write?
---Rocky on 9/9/11


Remember that divorce does not expunge the commandment to love one another - in a true Christian sense. It would be best if you both could and are comfortable with seeing one another in true Christian fellowship. But it also would be a good idea to check the details with your lawyer first - not about loving one another but the legal implications, if any, of seeing one another. And then let the Spirit - who knows all the details and ramifications of your relationship - guide you.
---Rocky on 9/9/11


Cluny provides a documented and specific definition from a dictionary. Eloy provides a sarcastic personal insult disguised as a hypothetical dictionary definition. Which is more credible? The two comments speak for themselves.
---StrongAxe on 9/9/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing


To answer your question, Eloy, no.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/9/11


could it be that if we looked up the word "lost" in the dictionary, the first definition listed would be 1. cluny.
---Eloy on 9/8/11


KarenD, of course they are freeloaders, but they have a reason to divorce. There is many reasons. We know they are wrong reasons many times. But many times there are good reasons. The question ask is if couples are allowed, they are not, but they do many times.
---Mark_V. on 9/6/11


The notion is silly. Just because some freeloaders make that decision doesn't make it right.
---KarenD on 9/4/11


Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service


KarenD, I believe that Kevin is correct. There is many reason why couples get divorced. I know of some who divorce so that they can get welfare for them and children, while the husband or ex still lives in the house. They want a free meal and don't want to work. There is many like those in California. So many look for a reason to swindle the system. Lets just call it what it is, sin. I'm sure there is many different reasons, the notion is not silly, it is real.
---Mark_V. on 9/4/11


Kevin5443...Nobody has to get a divorce for financial reasons. This notion is silly. We have seen too many couples in similar situations who chose to stay married and care for their sick loved ones.
---KarenD on 9/3/11


From an on-line etymological dictionary:

divorce (n.)
late 14c., from O.Fr. divorce (14c.), from L. divortium "separation, dissolution of marriage," from divertere "to separate, leave one's husband, turn aside" (see divert). Not distinguished in English from legal separation until mid-19c. The verb is late 14c., from O.Fr. divorcer. Related: Divorced, divorcing

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/3/11


this is interesting blog! as we are seeing more and more elderly couples having to divorce,because they cannot get financial aid to help take care of their spouses,if they are still married :'(
---kevin5443 on 9/3/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements


Cluny, lie becomes you.
---Eloy on 9/2/11


Smurf....Why would this be a problem unless there is a restraining order? why get a divorce in the first place?
---KarenD on 9/2/11


\\People cannot divorce and also stay together, ...\\

Oh, I have heard of many divorced couples who have nevertheless remained friends.

They simply didn't want to be married. "Two nice people not made for each other," is how one such couple put it.

\\for the word "divorce" means "forced division",\\

Again you post untruth. "Divorce" is from the Latin word "to divert".

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/2/11


Yes, they are allowed, but the awkwardness would not be beneficial. People cannot divorce and also stay together, for the word "divorce" means "forced division", so if a spouse is cutting off a member of their one flesh, say, cutting off and arm from their body, then it would be strange for the one whom cut off their right limb to want that dismembered part to see each other. No, this would not be healthy at all.
---Eloy on 9/2/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


Unfortunatly divorce does not completely separate people. If kids are involved, random running into each other, packages still being sent to someone's house, if loans are in one person's name but used by the other just a few examples of ties between divorcing people. The breaking of all the ties between two people who were married takes a while.
---Scott1 on 9/2/11


I would not want to see my soon to be ex, unless we had kids together. Otherwise I would be trying to immediately rebuild my life without....him. Difficult enough as that is. Why complicate things? Begin to focus on other things even if he seems to want to be around you, This is normal , for a while. Don't let him lull you back into thinking it can work,again. I doubt that very seriously.
---Robyn on 9/1/11


because one was forced into it or I would have been liable for a huge amount of money to pay out for a lawyer for the 4th dwi and even though my wife has an illness it affects me directly. So i HAD to get out of it just to save my own hide. But I still love her
---mike on 9/1/11


\\my question why divorce if you still "see eachother????\\

Maybe they can't stand living with each other.

Maybe there are reasons we don't know why they must terminate the civil and secular effects of their marriage (which is all all divorce does).

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/1/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


smurf as you see (why shoose a pdeudonym of a little bleu dwarf? ) most of us are puzzled by your question, soo unless your a hoax, pleas enlighten us...
---andy3996 on 9/1/11


Just curious as to why would you want to? And why get a divorce if you still desire to see him? (just curious).
---Donna5535 on 9/1/11


Two Christians do not have the option of divorce > 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 > by "Christian", I mean a person who obeys God's word and therefore is able to submit to how God corrects him or her so they do better so they don't get a divorce. Also, we have 1 Corinthians 6:1-11, about how it is a shame to bring a Christian matter into secular court. But if someone does despise God's word enough to take your matital matters into a secular court, instead of to God's people, I would say not to negotiate with that person, but stay clear of the whole thing, in honor of Jesus' blood that He payed for us to honor God's word.
---Bill_willa6989 on 9/1/11


Why would they not be? There's no law against it.

However, generally they don't, and if they have to contact each other, they do so through their lawyers, who are getting paid to do this.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/1/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


To see each other is fine but if you have an intimate relationship in some States that males the divorce null and void. It is seen by law as if all reasons for the divorce had been forgiven and you are going to try marriage with that person again.
---Darlene_1 on 9/1/11


UNLESS THERE's A restrainingorder.

my question why divorce if you still "see eachother????

that sounds ridiculous
NO OFFENCE MEANT, its just strange to me.
---andy3996 on 9/1/11


That is an issue better discussed with your attorney then on ChristiaNet.
---Blogger9211 on 9/1/11


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.