Any good Christian can tell you when the Bible approves of divorce. Let's see ... that would be for adultery, abandonment, and ... oh, yeah ... abuse. You might be interested to know that no such approval is in our Bibles. Let's take a look.
In Matthew 19, Pharisees tested Jesus with the loaded question, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?" (Matt 19:3). (The original "no-fault divorce" option.) This was a no-win, you see? If He said it was, they'd have Him for disregarding marriage. If He said it wasn't, they'd get Him on ignoring Moses. Jesus answered, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate" (Matt 19:4-6). What was His answer? It was not, "Sure!" (obviously). But it also wasn't, "Well, there are a few reasons ..." His answer was a resounding, "No! What God has joined together, let not man separate." They unloaded their second volley -- "Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?" (Matt 19:7) Jesus undercut them in a heartbeat. "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so" (Matt 19:8). Don't miss what He did there. First, it was "Moses did not command; he allowed." In no case is anyone ever commanded to divorce. Second, He gave the only reason for divorce: "your hardness of heart." That is, "If your hearts weren't so hard, there would never be any option for divorce." Jesus followed that with the famous "exception clause" -- "And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery" (Mat 19:9). I've mentioned in the past the problem with "sexual immorality" in this text. He did not use the word for "adultery"; He used the word for "sexual immorality." He used the word for adultery in the next phrase, so He knew the word. Why do we assume He was talking about adultery as an exception? Beyond that, He did not say that divorce was approved in that case. He said that remarriage wasn't adultery.
Scripture talks about divorce for sexual immorality (often understood to be "adultery") and for abandonment by an unbelieving spouse (1 Cor 7:12-16). In the former case, it was actually about remarriage. In the latter case, it does not approve of initiating the divorce. It speaks of the unbeliever leaving. Jesus said the only reason any believer gets a divorce is hardness of heart. God says, "I hate divorce" (Mal 2:16). Now, we know that divorce happens. If your spouse divorces you, you have not sinned. Clearly. And we know that divorce is not the unpardonable sin. But given Jesus's words on the subject, I would think that divorce would not be a possible solution in a believer's toolbox. If we are followers of Christ, lovers of God, I'd think we'd be pursuing His best and not His least. "I know God hates that, but I'm okay with it," would not be a godly line of thinking.
4 comments:
I've often puzzled at believers pointing to this passage as an allowance for divorce. While I agree it is an allowance, I've often argued that the allowance isn't for a good reason. To use this passage is to admit to a hard heart. No Christian should be happy to admit having a hard heart.
Is adultery not sexual immorality? I think this came the last time you addressed this. At first he speaks of sexual immorality, which I would say must include adultery, since that is immoral sexual behavior for a married person to indulge. And clearly then, He provides one exception (an umbrella term, so thus there can be more than one exception specifically) to say that remarriage is not then adulterous. Thus, the lesson here is that to divorce and remarry is adultery...sexual immorality...unless the divorce was compelled by the spouse's infidelity. Thus, in that case, it would be a possible solution in a believers tool box.
But it is only on the level of a last resort. I've always felt that were my wife to have partaken in sexual congress with another man...an absurd thought given what a great catch I am...I would seek to address whatever compelled that behavior, forgive her and move to carry on as if it never happened. As such, divorce is acceptable where sexual immorality took place, but that doesn't mean it's in any way preferable to keeping the vows taken.
Without even needing to debate whether or not Jesus was speaking of adultery when He said "sexual immorality," while Jesus says that remarriage after a divorce in the case of "sexual immorality" is not adultery, He does not say, "Go ahead and divorce for that," let alone, as some say, "You are required to divorce for that." Jesus's first answer to the question was "Never; what God has joined let not man separate." His second answer was "Moses allowed divorce for hard-heartedness." So, the best a believer seeking a divorce (I emphasize that because divorce does happen TO people without them choosing it) can say is, "I'm too hard-hearted to forgive as I should and work on the marriage as I ought." I would say, then, that your last paragraph would be the correct response if your spouse cheated on you rather than the more common go-to of divorce. My point is that Jesus did not say, "Divorce on the basis of sexual immorality is a good thing."
And I also don't believe He saw it as a default position when infidelity takes place. He certainly doesn't encourage divorce for it. But still, He's not actually distinguishing between adultery and sexual immorality as the context in which each is mentioned is distinct from the other.
Post a Comment