Like Button

Thursday, August 30, 2007

The "D" Word

Divorce and remarriage ... always a hot topic for discussion. You'll find Christians who will argue that it is always, always, always wrong to divorce (let alone remarry) and you will find Christians who will argue that it is okay to divorce and remarry whenever it suits you. Their arguments will have varying biblical support. Generally what you will find, however, is that the side that argues that it divorce is completely banned have never faced the situation themselves and the side that argues that divorce and remarriage is okay have been divorced and remarried. In other words, most argue from their experience, not the biblical facts. The majority, then, fall somewhere in the middle. Divorce and remarriage is wrong ... except in certain circumstances. The standard exceptions are adultery and desertion. These terms are variously defined to further muddy the waters. Adultery can be defined as "lust after another", and desertion can be defined as "not entirely present". In these terms, divorce and remarriage for, say, pornography or even looking at another person of the opposite sex would be validated as divorce for adultery. In these terms, also, divorce and remarriage for spouse abuse or not paying sufficient attention to the spouse would be classified as "desertion" and validate the divorce. You can see there are various permutations. Still, most are from experience or emotion, not biblical justification.

I used to be one that argued that divorce and remarriage was always wrong. I argued it because of biblical reasons. I don't hold that hard line anymore. But you need to consider the hard line before you back off to an easier position because it is always better to hold to a higher standard that may not be entirely necessary than to acquiesce to a lower standard that may just be sin. So what led me to the position that divorce and remarriage was always wrong? That came from two primary sources.

The first source is Jesus's commentary on the topic:
3 Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?" 4 And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." 7 They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?" 8 He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery" (Matt. 19:3-9).
Now, carefully, without inserting your emotional response and keeping in mind textual and cultural context, look at that passage. First, notice the question of the day: "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?" (v 3). That was the question Jesus answered first. His answer: "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate" (v 6). He did it without equivocation. He didn't offer excuses or exceptions. He stated it clearly. The so-called "exception clause" of verse 9 would never have been if the Pharisees who were testing Him had accepted His answer. The answer: No!

The Pharisees, however, were testing Him. It was a "no win" question in their minds. It looked as if Genesis contradicted Deuteronomy, so Jesus couldn't answer. They were wrong. The second question was why Moses allowed divorce (v 7). Jesus said it was due to hardness of heart (v 8). But Jesus didn't leave it at that. He took it a step farther. Not only was divorce due to hardness of heart, but remarriage would be adultery (v 9). Of course, at this point I have bypassed the famous exception clause: "except for immorality." Historically, this is the clause that many have used to allow for divorce on the basis of adultery. This is the clause that others use to approve divorce on the basis of pornography or even lustful thoughts on the part of the spouse. So take a careful look at the verse. There are a couple of things we are ignoring. First, the verse is not about divorce; it is about remarriage. Jesus didn't say, "Whoever divorces his wife commits adultery." It is remarriage that is the adultery. A person who divorces their spouse, never remarries, and remains celibate cannot be accused of adultery. Second, and most importantly, the term is "immorality", not adultery. You see, in Jesus time ("cultural context"), as demonstrated by John 8, the remedy for an adulterous spouse was not divorce; it was death. You didn't become divorced; you became a widowed. It is unlikely, given the biblical rules on the subject, that adultery was in view here. While it is indeed sexual immorality in view, there are a variety of possibilities offered instead adultery. Some argue that the "immorality" in view is pre-marital. In biblical times, a betrothal was the equivalent to a marriage in some sense. The only way to terminate an engagement was divorce. That's why when Joseph found out his betrothed was pregnant, he was considering "putting her away" (Matt. 1:19) -- the same term as "divorce". He would have been justified because she apparently had committed "immorality" before they were married. It could also be if a spouse discovers that their spouse was married under false pretenses. He or she wasn't a virgin. He or she had an undisclosed prior marriage. Or if a couple were too closely related (incest), they could legally divorce and remarry. There are lots of possibilities, but adultery isn't likely one of them because adultery was a death sentence. So the best we can say about God's view of divorce is that it is due to human hard-heartedness. Not good.

The second factor that led me to believe that divorce and remarriage was always wrong was God's use of marriage. In Eph. 5:28-32, Paul draws a parallel between the oneness of marriage and the union of Christ to the Church. John tells of the marriage supper of the Lamb in Rev. 19:9, where the Church serves as the Bride of Christ. Marriage, then, is intended by God to be a picture of the union of His Son to His people. Now, when Moses damaged a picture God was drawing for His people (Num. 20), it cost him entrance into the Promised Land. So it seems to me that damaging pictures God intends for His people is a dangerous thing to do, and divorce doesn't fit into that picture.

Why did I end up short of that absolute? Well, first there is the passage in the Old Testament where God divorced Israel (Jer. 3:8). If divorce is always a sin, God sinned. That doesn't work at all, does it? Then there was the 1 Cor. 7 passages. Paul speaks in 1 Cor. 7:12-16 of Christians married to non-Christians. "Don't leave," he tells them, "but if they leave, you are not bound." "Not bound"? In what sense are they not bound? The hardcore anti-divorce types will tell you "They are not under any condemnation." But that doesn't seem to be the sense of it. Further, Paul says more using the same terminology. "Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you marry, you have not sinned" (1 Cor. 7:27-28). There are two types in view here -- "bound to a wife" and "released from a wife". They are contrasted. And "released from a wife" cannot refer to "never married" because you cannot be "released" if you were never "bound". What does Paul say to this "released from a wife" person? "Don't look to get married." Fine. But then, "If you marry, you have not sinned."

God hates divorce (Mal. 2:16). Divorce should never be a Christian option (Matt. 19:6, 8; 1 Cor. 7:10-11). Divorce is painful and damaging ... at best. The only reason for divorce, according to Jesus, is hard-heartedness, certainly not a noble character trait. That being said, I don't believe it can be categorically classified as sin since God did it, and it appears that there are circumstances, perhaps rare and hard to define, in which remarriage is acceptable without causing adultery. Perhaps, before we become too lenient on the topic, we should examine the biblical evidence. On the other hand, before we become to judgmental on the subject, we should examine the biblical evidence. Personal experience is not a good determiner of what God thinks is good. Let's be careful on this topic not to judge too lightly or too harshly.

3 comments:

Refreshment in Refuge said...

Agreed, agreed, agreed, brother dear.

It is something most Christians do not want to hear and most non-Christians point at to say, "See, they are no better than me."

It is hard to live up to the standard we are supposed to live up to. Thank you, Lord Jesus, for being so forgiving! Amen.

Anonymous said...

I have thought about this before..and I know I probably have no business asking..because God is sovereign in fact and if marriage vows are said before Him than He probably ordained it-right?? Or maybe not..?? :confused:

The scripture starts out, "What God has joined together...".
Are we always certain that God does the joining? Can we go outside of God's perfect will and get married because we usurp our own authority, denying Him the right to make those choices for us? What does that mean, "What God has joined together"?

And what about separation..what happens to the believer then? How is one supposed to continue in ministry when they can't even keep their marriage from failing? I know that Pastors, teachers and elders are suppose to be above reproach, but shouldn't all believers be above reproach?
Your right..there is much pain and agony because of the guilt and feelings of shame and inadequacy also. Never intending to fail the Lord but seeing failure none the less.

Your post was very timely..

Stan said...

Reasonable questions. The first one, "What God has joined together," is answered in your premise. Is God sovereign or isn't He? But the phrase, "What God has joined together," isn't meant to be a condition, suggesting, "It's possible to get married without God joining you together." It's an explanation. Paul calls the union of husband and wife a great mystery. If two people get married, they are joined, and God does it.

On separation, Paul says, "To the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband (but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not send his wife away" (1 Cor. 7:10-11). Separation is "second best", but tolerable if 1) you remain celibate for the rest of your life, or 2) you reconcile with your spouse.

And, while we all are to attain to the highest standard, all of us have the highest standard for leadership. That is, "If you are going to be our leader, you had better have reached a spiritual maturity that we haven't." Based on 1 Tim. 3 and Titus 1, people who serve as leaders are supposed to have their houses in order. That's the standard. Of course, you may have to figure out what to do if it happened before Christ and that sort of thing ...