Divorce

     There is much confusion and there are some estranged teachings that are being put out concerning marriage and divorce. Many of the doctrines that are being put forth are prejudiced in their format due to the felt need of many to appease the mounting wave of divorces that the church has to deal with. This is especially of concern in the cases of those who have gone through marriages and divorces prior to their conversions. The problem is that the arguments and the paradigms being used to justify divorces in ones prior life, before becoming a Christian, are being used to condone and justify divorce and remarriage among Christians for any reason. Through great conviction, study, and prayer I have written this lesson to help those who are concerned about rightly dividing the word on this matter. It is the intent of this lesson to simplify the understanding of this subject with only the very necessary references to the Greek texts and to follow a logical, straight forward, step by step approach. At times I will interject some references to some teachings that have missed the mark in following this paradigm.

Putting Away

      We will begin with the teaching of Jesus from Matthew 19:

“3 And the Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, “Is t permitted for a man to dismiss his wife for every cause?” 4 He concluded, saying to them, “Have you not read that He who made them from the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5  and He said, ‘because of this, a man shall leave his father and mother and be united with his wife and the two will become one flesh’? 6 Hence, they are no longer two, but they are one flesh. That which God yokes together, mankind cannot separate.” 7 Then they said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a writ of divorce and dismiss her?” 8 Jesus said to them, “Moses, because of your hard hearts, permitted you to dismiss your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you that whoever should dismiss his wife, and it is not for fornication, and marries another, is committing adultery. And the one being dismissed commits adultery by marrying.” 10 And the disciples said, “If this is the case with a man and the wife, it is not favorable to marry.” 11 But He said to them, “Not everyone can accept that saying, but only the one to whom it has been given, 12 for there are eunuchs who were born this way from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who are emasculated by mankind, and there are eunuchs who have emasculated themselves for the kingdom of the heavens. The one who is able to receive it, receive it.” (Matt 19:3-12)

     As we consider the message of Jesus from Matthew 19:3-12, we must consider who this message is meant for. When Jesus spoke this message, it was to the people of God under the Old Covenant, Israel. In this lesson we will prove that it was a message that was pointing to a transition into the New Covenant, just as the Sermon on the Mount did. It is always important to compare scripture with scripture to make viable assessments of intent; therefore, comparing spiritual things with spiritual things.

     In verse 8 Jesus makes a reference to the criteria of the Old Covenant, as to Moses allowing men to put away their wives for any cause by giving a writ of divorce. Then He adds the statement: “…but from the beginning it was not so.” After this He uses a phrase that He used several times in the Sermon on the Mount to show an upgrading from the Old Covenant: “…but I tell you...” In Matthew 5:21-22, Jesus upgraded the criteria of condemnation against hatred by saying:

“You have heard that it was said by the ancestors, ‘Do not murder, and whoever murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. And whoever calls his brother, ‘Worthless! ’ will be subject to the council. But whoever says, ‘You moron!’ will be liable to hellfire” (Matt 5:21-22 underline added).

     Jesus upgraded the judgment against adultery by saying:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery. ‘ 28 But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:27-28).

     Concerning this same subject of divorce He said:

“It has also been said, ‘Whoever should put away his wife must give her a writ of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that whoever dismisses his wife, except in a case of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever marries a woman who is dismissed commits adultery” (Matthew 5:31-32).

     This comparison is important for us to see in order to prove that Jesus was not simply speaking to the Jews, but He is giving an upgraded message for the church of the New Covenant. In both cases in Matthew the context of the message is directed at marriage between two believers. We will look at more evidence concerning that later as we consider what Paul says concerning the dismissal of a spouse in 1 Corinthians 7. At this point it is important to realize that this is a message that is directed toward two believers. This message of Jesus is not addressed to unbelievers or even to a one who has become a believer and has an unbelieving spouse.

     The conversation in the text of Matthew 19:3-12 begins with a question to Jesus as to whether it is lawful for a man to dismiss his wife for any reason. This was a common occurrence in the culture of the Jews. It is necessary to note that the Greek word used here for putting away is “apoluo”. The original use of this word is to release or set free. It is sometimes translated as divorce, which may detract from the understanding that a man could release a wife but it was not credible under the law between two believers without the writ of divorce. There is no evidence, however, that dismissing a wife without a writ was a crucial issue among the Israelites. There was no need to put her away without a writ, since a writ of divorce was easy to do. Historians do record that it was a common practice for the Israelites to give a writ of divorce for any reason. The Israelite leaders would often marry women when they traveled to areas for an extended time and then they would give them a writ of divorce upon their departure. Jesus’ answer to the question was as follows:

“Have you not read that He who made them from the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and He said, ‘because of this, a man shall leave his father and mother and be united with his wife and the two will become one flesh’? 6 Hence, they are no longer two, but they are one flesh. That which God joins together, mankind cannot separate” (Matt 19:4-6).

     The precedent that Jesus sets is one that precedes the Law of Moses. From the beginning of the creation this was not the way it was to be. A man was to leave his father and mother and be united with his wife. They are not two separate people, but they are one. This is a union which He tells them man cannot separate because it is of God. One teaching that gives an erring picture of this passage proposes that Jesus was not telling the people that they could not give a writ of divorce for just any reason, but rather, that He is saying they cannot dismiss a wife unless they give the writ of divorce. The claim is that Jesus was only teaching against dismissing a wife without the writ of divorce. But the Jews who heard it had no problem understanding exactly what Jesus was saying. They knew that He was telling them that a man could not dismiss his wife for just any reason, even with a writ of divorce, because it was God who had yoked them together. That is what prompted the question that came afterward:

“Why then did Moses command to give a writ of divorce and dismiss her?” (Matt 19:7)

     If they had not understood that Jesus was telling them that a writ of man does not sever the ordained joining of two people by God, they would not have asked this question. The word that is translated for divorce here is the word “apostasion” which means separation or departure. It is coupled with the word “biblion” which means a “roll,” which I have translated in the text as “writ.” It is the word that is used to describe a scroll on which they wrote documents in their day. The Jews realized that the putting away of a wife was permissible under the Law of Moses simply by giving a writ of divorce, and that what Jesus had said was contrary to the Law of Moses. There are a number of people who have been swayed by the teaching that this is not the case here. The errant teaching is that the “apoluo,” the act of putting away, and “apostasion,” the written decree, are two separate subjects, and that Jesus is saying you cannot just dismiss a wife that God has joined you to, but you can still give a writ of divorce for just any reason. I hope I am clear here. They teach that Jesus was only telling them that they could not simply dismiss their wives for any reason, hence, “apoluo,” dismiss or put away. But they can still divorce for whatever reason. Their teaching is that Jesus was reinforcing the Law of Moses rather than upgrading it to the more spiritual teaching. The crutch upon which this doctrine leans is the statement of Jesus in Matthew 5:17, where Jesus said:

“Don’t assume that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.”

     It is being taught that because of this statement, Jesus would not say anything that would be contrary to the Law of Moses, therefore, He could not be saying that you cannot give a writ of divorce for just any reason. They reason that since Jesus said He did not come to destroy the Law, He would not teach anything contrary to the law. This paradigm of interpretation is not consistent with what we have already disclosed concerning the Sermon on the Mount. Consider the teaching of Jesus on forgiveness from Matthew 5:38-39:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39 But I say to you, do not resist the wicked. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.”

     According to the aforementioned paradigm of interpretation, we would have to conclude that Jesus would not say anything contrary to Moses, therefore, we can revert to an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. If we revert to the Old Covenant Law concerning marriage, then we also have to concede that there is no provision in the law for a woman to divorce her husband, only for a man to divorce his wife. Women were not permitted to divorce under the Old Covenant Law. It was a one way street. We would also have to concede that men can still have more than one wife. This was also permissible under the Law.

Among the teachings of Matthew 19:3-12, there is another point that Jesus makes that is contrary to the Law. Consider the statement in Matthew 19:9

:

“And I say to you that whoever should dismiss his wife, and it is not for fornication, and marries another is committing adultery. And the one being dismissed is committing adultery by marrying.”

     Under the Law of Moses this statement would not be true. If a man were permitted to have more than one wife, taking a second wife would not be an act of adultery no matter whether he had dismissed his first wife by proper writ or not. This statement contradicts the Law of Moses which permitted a man to have two wives.

     What God has joined together a man cannot separate, no matter what he may write on a document. Therefore, he is still married in the eyes of God and his second marriage is not recognized by God as a marriage, but, rather, it is an act of fornication resulting in adultery. If Jesus’ statement of Matt 19:9 was only in context to clarifying the Law of Moses, then His statement would be a false statement, as it was permitted for a man to have multiple wives under the Law of Moses. Taking a second wife would not be an act of adultery if this context is concerning the Law of Moses. This proves that Jesus is not justifying the Law of Moses to the Jews, but He is rather professing the higher law regarding the New Covenant; that a man taking a second wife is adultery, and that no writ of divorce is of any value unless it is for the cause of fornication.

     The Jews whom Jesus was speaking to understood fully that putting away under the law and giving a writ of divorce were synonymous, and that Jesus was saying something that was contrary to what Moses had permitted. That is why they asked the aforementioned question: 

“Why then did Moses command to give divorce papers and to send her away?” (Matt 19:7).

     Even the disciples understood that Jesus was giving them a new concept, which can be seen in their statement from Matthew 19:10:

“And the disciples said, ‘If this is the case with a man and the wife, it is not favorable to marry.’”

     If Jesus had not said what was contrary to the Law of Moses this statement would not make sense. The disciples were so entrenched in the tradition that a man could dismiss a wife for just any reason by simply giving a writ of divorce that the idea of not being able to dismiss her so easily for any reason was too difficult to perceive. They concluded that a man might be better off not even to marry. Any teaching that ignores these obvious evidences is a doctrine of blinded prejudice. Jesus is not condoning the giving of a writ of divorce for just any reason. He is clarifying His teaching that a believer cannot dismiss his believing wife, even with a writ of divorce, except for the cause of fornication.

     It should not seem unlikely to anyone that Jesus would teach something that was above the Law of Moses while He was on this earth. Even in the case of the woman caught in adultery in John 8, if Jesus was simply going to uphold the Law of Moses He would have simply told the crowd to go ahead and stone her. Rather than doing that, He convicted the crowd of their own sins and frankly forgave the woman for her transgression. This was contrary to the Law of Moses. Jesus did not destroy the Law by these teachings. He fulfilled the Law and perfected it to a greater covenant.

What God Has Joined Together

     In order to see the full picture of marriage for believers and divorce in the eyes of God, one must come to grips with this statement of Jesus: “That which God yokes together, mankind cannot separate.” (Matt 19:6). What has God yoked together? Let us look well into the passage of Paul in the New Covenant out of 1 Cor. 7:1-16:

“Now in response to the matters you wrote about: ‘It is good for a man not to have relations with a woman.’ 2 But because sexual immorality is so common, each man should have his own wife, and each woman should have her own husband. 3 A husband should fulfill his responsibility to his wife, and likewise a wife to her husband. 4 A wife does not have the right over her own body, but her husband does. In the same way, a husband does not have the right over his own body, but his wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another except when you agree for a time, to devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again; otherwise, Satan may tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say the following as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all people were just like me. But each has his own gift from God, one person in this way and another in that way. 8 I say to the unmarried and to widows: It is good for them if they remain as I am. 9 But if they do not have self-control, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with desire. 10 I command the married—not I, but the Lord—a wife is not to leave her husband. 11 But if she does leave, she must remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband—and a husband is not to leave his wife. 12 But I say to the rest (not the Lord): If any brother has an unbelieving wife and she is willing to live with him, he must not leave her. 13 Also, if any woman has an unbelieving husband and he is willing to live with her, she must not leave her husband. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through the husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. 15 But if the unbeliever leaves, let him leave. A brother or a sister is not bound in such cases. God has called you to peace. 16 For you, wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband? Or you, husband, how do you know whether you will save your wife?” (1 Cor 7:1-16).

     It is clear from Paul’s opening statement - “Now in response to the matters you wrote about” - that the church has had some questions about the subject Paul is about to address concerning marriage relationships. Verses 1-5 are directed toward the responsibility of a married couple to satisfy their spouse sexually in order to strengthen them in resisting temptation to commit fornication.

     In verses 6-8 Paul addresses his concerns for the unmarried and the widows. Paul asserts the advantages of being as he is, in that he did not have a desire for sexual relations. He asserts that it leaves one free to do the work of the Lord without a cumbrance, but he admits that it is not reasonable to assume this calling upon everyone since we are all different in our make-up and calling. Because of this, many people need to marry in order not to be tempted into fornication.

     In verses 10-11 Paul reverts back to a message aimed at those who are married. In this part he reaffirms the words of the Lord that were taught in Mathew 19: 

I command the married—not I, but the Lord—a wife is not to leave her husband. 11 But if she does leave, she must remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband—and a husband is not to leave his wife” (1 Cor 7:10-11).

     This is an affirmation of what the Lord had said. Marriage is for life. It is what God has joined together. If you must separate for a time, you must remain unmarried or be reconciled back to your spouse. Divorce is not an option, unless it meets the criteria the Lord gave of committing fornication (sexual immorality). It needs to be noted here that Paul addresses that there may be times of separation. It would be unreasonable to believe that there cannot be issues in a relationship that may cause a need for a time of separation and counsel. It may even come to a point of having to dis-fellowship a spouse by the church, such as a case of an abusive spouse. Whatever the case is, they must remain unmarried until they are reconciled, except where fornication occurs.

     In verses 12-16 Paul is addressing a marriage situation between a believer and an unbeliever. Paul begins this lesson by saying: “But I say to the rest (not the Lord).” Those who lean towards a carnal view see this statement as a proclamation by Paul that what he is about to say is not coming from God as Holy Spirit inspired but, rather, that Paul is about to go off on an opinionated banter. This gives them the option to either take it or leave it. A spiritually focused look at the context of this passage combined with the words of the Lord in Matthew 19:3-12 and Matthew 5:31-32 will lead one to see a complete picture. Paul had just reiterated what the Lord Himself had taught concerning marriage. We can see this in his statement: 

“I command the married-not I but the Lord.” (1 Cor 7:10)

      Now Paul is about to add a new teaching. What Jesus had addressed was to the married believers in the Lord. What Paul is about to address is a different situation than what Jesus addressed. He is about to speak to the “rest,” that is, those who are married to an unbeliever.

It is understandable as to why the church would have a written Paul a question concerning this situation. What happens when a person converts to Christianity and their spouse does not? This would have been a common scenario then, and it still is today. It should not be assumed that this teaching is a writ of permission for Christians to purposely marry someone who is outside of Christ, as that would encourage a carnal mindset over a spiritual mindset. Paul later said, in 1 Cor. 7:39:

“A wife is bound as long as her husband is living. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to anyone she wants—only in the Lord.”

     If one loves the Lord, that person would not want to bind themselves into a relationship to one who does not love the Lord. They would not want to subject their children to being raised by one who is an infidel. Their desire to marry the unbeliever is based in carnal desire and shows a blind disregard to the glory of Christ. I must clarify that I am using spiritual language here. When I say, “One who loves the Lord,” I am referring to one who keeps the commandments of God through the teachings of Christ and the Apostles’ doctrine. Jesus said, 

“If you love Me, Keep My commandments” (John 14:15.) 

     Those who do not keep the commandments and teachings of Christ do not love Him. This eliminates all of those who follow after the myriad of false denominations that exist today. In Ephesians 5:22-33, Paul makes a comparison of marriage to that of Christ and His bride, the church. Can an unbelieving husband fulfill the role of Christ in the marriage? Can the unbelieving wife fulfill the role of the Church in obedience to her head? In the passage of Ephesians Paul describes the church/wife as one whom Christ has cleansed with the washing of water by the word. That is a direct reference to baptism. Does the unbeliever fulfill this role? Those who seek to defend the intentional marriage of a believer to an unbeliever are blinded from the spiritual picture by carnal desire. If the one who is desired is not spiritual, then the attraction is carnal.

     The question by the church concerning the one who has become a believer and has an unbelieving spouse would be a matter of great concern to them because under the Old Covenant Law the believers would have been required to send away their spouses, and even their children, in order to be sanctified by God; as in the example of Ezra 10:1-4:

“While Ezra prayed and confessed, weeping and falling facedown before the house of God, an extremely large assembly of Israelite men, women, and children gathered around him. The people also wept bitterly. 2 Then Shecaniah son of Jehiel, an Elamite, responded to Ezra: ‘We have been unfaithful to our God by marrying foreign women from the surrounding peoples, but there is still hope for Israel in spite of this. 3 Let us therefore make a covenant before our God to send away all the ⌊foreign⌋ wives and their children, according to the counsel of my lord and of those who tremble at the command of our God. Let it be done according to the law. 4 Get up, for this matter is your responsibility, and we support you. Be strong and take action!’”

     What God has done in the text of 1 Cor. 7 is upgrade the teaching of the Law to make a merciful concession for the situation. He informs them that they not only can remain with the unbelieving spouse, but that it is desirable. He presents the picture that God has sanctified their marital relationship through the believer and has, therefore, made the children clean.

“For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through the husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy” (1 Cor 7:14).

     Paul makes it clear here that it is through the believer that the marriage relationship is sanctified; hence, if there is no believer, there is no sanctification. Let us consider again the words of Jesus, 

“Therefore, what God has joined together, man must not separate” (Matt 19:6). 

     That which is not sanctified by God is not joined together by God. Those who are married as unbelievers cannot be sanctified because there is no believer in the process. This even carries to the point that after the conversion of one to become a believer that person is not bound to the unbeliever. They can depart, and there is no binding. There is no requirement for a writ of divorce in this context when one is an unbeliever. It is just as when Ezra told the Israelites to send away their pagan wives and children. There was no requirement for a writ of divorce because those marriages were not sanctified by God. Marriages outside of the sanction of God are no different than two people who have lived together.  In working abroad, I often come into situations of multiple marriages between pagans. It becomes an issue as to their conversion. What do they do concerning their multiple marriages? There was once a pagan priest who had seven wives. Would it be feasible to believe that God had joined this man together with all of these wives during his pagan priesthood? In the same way, it is not comprehensible that God joins together the unbelievers in whom there is no Holy Spirit.

     There are also those who would argue this point from the standpoint that an individual should remain bound to their first spouse, whether they were in Christ or not. That is not so hard to do when it is not you who is the one who has the issue, but there is something that they should also consider from 1 Corinthians 6:16-17:

“Don’t you know that anyone joined to a prostitute is one body with her? For Scripture says, The two will become one flesh. 17 But anyone joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.”

     Notice that Paul quotes from the Lord by saying that the two have become one flesh. Paul says this about a man having a sexual encounter with a prostitute. This tells us that it is sexual intercourse that consummates the marriage and brings it to completion as their being one flesh. If it is true that one is bound to the first person to whom they had become one flesh with, would they not be bound to the first person with whom they had a sexual relationship? You can see the difficulty that can come when people do not see the fullness of this picture and they attempt to see all marriages as being joined together by God.

     One should also be able to see the danger of condemnation that is brought upon Christians by churches teaching them that they can divorce and remarry for just any reason. The truth is that unless God has separated an ordained marriage they are not separated from the first spouse. The two are still one and joined together in the eyes of God. No writ of man can separate them by circumventing what God has said, just as no marriage certificate written by men can overrule the word of God. Men may write a certificate allowing two men to marry, but that will have no authority before God, or His church, any more than a divorce decree written by men that is not in accord with the will of God. Jesus was clear when He said:

“…but I tell you, whoever puts away his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery” (Matt 19:9).

     The marriage to another could not be called adultery if that person was not still bound to the first marriage. Some would try to argue that this act of adultery is a onetime thing. Once the marriage to the second person is complete, they are no longer in adultery and they can go on their merry way. But to God the second marriage is not a sanctified marriage. It is an unsanctified act of fornication. So how does that work? If your spouse goes out to commit sexual immorality with someone, is it only sexual immorality the first time they have a sexual relation, and after that it is okay? After all, they have become one flesh at that point, even if one is joined to a harlot.  Unless the offended spouse gives the offender a writ of divorce for their adultery, they are still bound to the first marriage. Just as in any adulterous situation, the spouse could choose to wait and seek the repentance of the erring spouse.

     Along this same line, there are those who would claim that even after the writ of divorce the offending spouse cannot marry again. In order to bind such a law one would have to add to the written word. When Jesus set free the woman caught in adultery, He only told her to go and sin no more. If someone has repented of their sins and they are no longer bound to another, it is not our place to add a burden upon them because it seems as though one needs to be punished for their sin. If one feels that they must dish out punishment upon them for their sin, then so be it; let the one who is without sin cast the first stone. But just remember, 

“…with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged” (Matt 7:2).

     Therefore, if you also are not married to the first person you became one flesh with in life, you are also guilty of the same sin.

     We are not to be as the world is in putting away a spouse for just any reason. We are to be holy and blameless in a ruthless and dark world where we shine as lights. May this message bring wisdom, conviction, relief, or repentance, wherever it may be needed.