“It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery” (Matt. 5:31-32).
Over the last month I have had the awesome privilege of teaching through the Sermon on the Mount during Sunday School to the adults at my church. Last Sunday, with my girlfriend and her mom (she was in town to visit) present I had the challenge of teaching on what I believe Jesus is teaching in these two verses in the Sermon on the Mount. It was a daunting task considering that this is an issue that I have been unsettled about for quite some time. Knowing that I must do my best to teach God’s Word to God’s people at my church I decided its time to delve deeper into this issue and see if, by God’s grace, I can’t make sense of this issue in Scripture.
For much of my Christian walk I thought these two verses were pretty straight-forward. I assumed that divorce was something God hated (Mal. 2:16) and thus remarriage constituted adultery as indicated in Matthew 5:32, 19:9, Luke 16:8, and Mark 10:11-12. Given that for much of my Christian walk I read the NIV, I assumed the exception clause in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, “execept for marital unfaithfulness” gave a valid exception by which a believer could rightly divorce and consequently remarry. I assumed that marital unfaithfulness was a reference to adultery. It made sense to me, what greater breach of trust in a marriage relationship is there than adultery? God created man and woman to be one flesh and thus if a spouse unites him or herself to another then they have broken the one flesh bond and thus the marriage might rightly be terminated . . . right? And if the exception applies to divorce, wouldn’t it follow that the exception applies to remarriage? For most of my life as a Christian I thought so, but I am not sure anymore.
There are four reasons that I began to feel unsettled about the view I held for so long. In this post I will give you the reasons I felt drawn to re-examine my long held position and in posts following I will lay out and defend the position I now strongly but cautiously lean toward. The first two reasons are textual and the second two are theological. Here they are:
- Neither Mark 10:11-12 nor Luke 16:8 contain the exception clause “except for marital unfaithfullness.” Also, Paul never mentions adultery as a grounds for remarriage in any of his teaching on marriage in his letters. The only grounds Paul mentions for remarriage is the death of the spouse (1 Cor. 7:11-12, 39). Paul gives abandonment as a grounds for divorce but never as a grounds for remarriage (1 Cor. 7:15-16). Further, a straightforward reading of Romans 7:1-4 would seem to indicate that any marriage conducted while one’s former spouse is alive constitutes adultery.
- The NIV’s rendering of the exception clause in Matt. 5:32 and 19:9 as “except for marital unfaithfulness” is less than satisfactory. The term “marital unfaithfullness” (in Greek “porneia”) should instead be translated “sexual immorality” and does not exclusively refer to adultery. If there is a valid exception being presented here it would seem to be broader than adultery. I will discuss this point further in a post to follow, but for now let me just say that Matthew’s term, porneia, in the exception clause does not specifically refer to adultery. This realization in particular was unsettling to me.
- In both Mark 10 and Matthew 19, Jesus is defends the sanctity of marriage by discussing God’s purpose for marriage in creation–that man and woman might become one flesh (Gen. 2:24). It seems hard for me to see how remarriage might be justified when God created man and woman to be one flesh–a bond that should not be broken. Further, Jesus rightly interprets Deut. 24:1-4 in these two gospel texts by indicating that Moses only permitted divorce because of the people’s hardness of heart. I will say more on this in posts to follow.
- The purpose of marriage for believers is to display the glory of God in redemption. Paul clearly sees marriage in Ephesians 5:25-33 as a picture of Christ’s relationship to the church. If God intends marriage to be a picture of the redemption we have through the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, then it is hard for me to understand how such a relationship could be severed and then another such relationship rightly begun. In other words, Christ is not going to divorce us–he will never leave us or forsake us and betroth Himself to another–we are his and nothing can separate us from His covenant love (Rom. 8:38)! Given that Paul compares marriage to this permanent relationship that Christ has wrought between Himself and His bride the church, it seems that God’s pattern for marriage would be one in which remarriage is not permitted except on grounds of the death of a spouse.
These are the concerns that drove me to reconsider this issue. In a forthcoming post I will defend the position I now strongly lean to. You have probably already guessed my position, which is fine. I know this is a difficult issue that touches many people personally, but I think it should be said that we don’t decide what we believe based on the circumstances around us, we base what we believe on what is true and God’s Word defines that for us. I don’t claim to have the final say on this issue, I merely hope these concerns and my upcoming post drive you to think carefully and biblically on what it means for man and woman to become one flesh and so display the glory of God in redemption. It is my prayer that this post and the posts to follow would encourage those who read it toward more faithful, God-honoring, Christ-exalting marriages!
[...] fa dot gs wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt 31 “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. -Matthew 5:31-32 Over the last month I have had the awesome priveldge of teaching through the Sermon on the Mount during Sunday School to the adults at my church. Last Sunday, with my girlfriend and her mom (she was in t [...]
I’ve been doing some examination of these issues myself… and have found much the same thing. It goes against the grain of even the “Christian culture” of today – but if it’s Biblical… what can you do?
Hey Drew, this first post on divorce and remarriage is well put and concise. I guess I couldn’t really tell what your position was before, but I can tell now. I certainly think much differently now than I did a few years ago.
I believe that divorce is only permissible on the ground of sexual immorality along with abandonment in 1 Cor. 7:15-16. Also, that remarriage is adultery if the spouse is still alive. So, that sounds pretty much like what you are describing. I have a ‘license’ to marry couples, but I have decided that I cannot, in good conscience and in faithfulness to the biblical texts, marry a man or women who has been divorced and their former spouse is still alive.
Maybe you’ll work through these harder questions in future posts: 1) Would you re-marry a person who had a permissible divorce (e.g. sexual immorality grounds)?, 2) How would you counsel a couple who have been divorced and have remarried?
I think to the first question, I would answer ‘no’, though likely with tearful compassion. To the second question, obviously two wrongs don’t make a right. If they have been remarried, they shouldn’t be separated again. But, there second marriage would still be sin, and the couple would need to repent and consecrate their marriage to God and praise him for his grace for us through Christ . . . that he can turn things for good.
I’m glad you’re working through this. We had similar conversations in our Anthropology class at SEBTS, especially as it would apply to tribal men who have several wives . . . when they believe and are saved, how do you counsel them about their multiple marriages?! It would be wrong to make him divorce all but one. Well, food for thought. I hope it went well when you preached this. How are things going with your gf?
I forgot to include this in my previous comment. Have you heard anyone talk about the ESV translation of Malachi 2:16?
It says, “For the man who hates and divorces, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts.” Now, hermeneutically, it really says the same thing as the NASB, “For I hate divorce, says the Lord, the God of Israel, and him who covers his garment with wrong, says the Lord of hosts.” But it gets at it in a round-about way. I certainly am not a Hebrew scholar, so I don’t know the syntax of the verse. However, the note for v. 16 in the ESV says, “Or ‘For the Lord, the God of Israel, says that he hates divorce.” So, I don’t really know why the ESV rearranges the verse to that degree, but it has caused some confusion. I have a friend at SEBTS who said she wouldn’t use the ESV for that specific reason. I use it for preaching, teaching, and Bible study first, then the NASB, but I can see why she said that. Too many people have quit their marriages, hurt their children and caused heartache to their own lives because they don’t think God minds divorce. However, as you have pointed out, it can be easily said that the Bible overtly says that God hates divorce in more ways than one.
Anyway, I thought you might find that interesting. Like I said, the ESV translation really says the same thing, but for some reason that I don’t know, it has been heavily rearranged in the ‘essentially literal’ translation.
Drew! Good to hear from you again.
This is cool, because it’s something I’ve been asked to think about in the past month. It’s such a gift of God to have a surprise contribution to my consideration. When I did research, I guess I felt the same way you did when you prepared this series. There’s no concensus, and the majority seems to argue from silence. I don’t know. It’s hard. I know that at present I couldn’t judge anyone who made a decision with which I disagree.
Thank you for sharing, and for the humble study you’ve done to seek the truth.
I have only been exposed to ESV for about a year, but I generally find it accurate; so I’m surprised to hear it consolidated the text in Malachi like that. But I study from KJV online (’cause that’s what the Greek and Hebrew search tools are available in), and go to other translations for different expressions (once I have an idea what the Greek or Hebrew is saying).
To God be all glory,
Lisa of Longbourn
Thank you for seeking God’s truth first and doing it with a heart of compassion. Your presentation was thorough and true to the text. It really caused me to rethink the issue of remarriage. I look forward to your next post!
Drew you better be carful your running right up on Roman Catholic teaching when it comes to divorce and remarrage. You know they couldn’t be right. Right?
Hey everyone!
I enjoyed my “return” post on this blog. It reminded me how much I love to write and how challenging but rewarding reading the Scriptures can be!
Thanks for your encouraging words Lisa, I am glad this post helped you.
Kelly, I am not sure what you mean, but I haven’t laid out my position yet and I think it might be different than what you think. Also we should be careful not to assume that every Roman Catholic position is de-facto false just because it is Roman Catholic.
On the ESV issue, I think I too would question their rendering of Malachi 2:16 but no translation is without problems, that is why we believe the original manuscripts are inerrant rather than our translations which were translated by grammarians and scholars who are prone to error. Due to the fact that some of our best translations have been given over to close study by numerous scholars and linguists, I think we can generally trust them, however there will be times when we need to study more closely to see if a certain translations rendering needs adjustment. I read the ESV for my devotions, I think it best combines readability and accuracy. I wouldn’t discredit it merely on its rendering of Mal 2:16 (I know you aren’t doing that Kevin). That is what the KJV-only guys do, they find a couple of verses that they think are better rendered in the KJV than the NIV or NASB and then categorically condemn all other translations without giving due consideration to the similar errors that could be leveled at the KJV.
Kevin–I will answer your questions in my post to follow–I think they are questions that are on everyone’s mind when this issue comes up. I am pretty close to where you are on the issue, I think.
Jennifer–thanks for reading this post–I was encouraged to have you there and to hear what you think. Thank you so much for your much needed encouragement!
[...] Cosmetic Surgery, Slavery and the New Testament (3), Leadership in the local Church, Spanking, and Divorce and Remarriage (2 posts and more to [...]
[...] Many conservative evangelicals see this as simply a reference to adultery. As I have previously outlined, “porneia” (the Greek word for sexual immorality) in the New Testament has a much [...]
I suspect that Kelly O’Brien was being facetious, in humorous reference to the way that our Catholic brethren are sometimes unjustly reviled by some non-Catholic Christians (Jack Chick comes to mind).
In reality, conservative evangelicals agree with the Catholic teachings on 90% of all topics. We sometimes think otherwise because all we talk about are the contentious things, e.g, transubstantiation, whether there’s enough difference between hyperdulia and latria, sola fide, sola scriptura, and so on.
But compare our disagreements with Catholics to our disagreements with, say, the average secularist tenured university literature professor specializing in Marxist critical theory, and suddenly you wanna give all those Catholics a big hug.
And, yeah, I find myself tentatively agreeing with the Catholic view: In general, remarriage is prohibited by Christianity.
“But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?” 1 Cor. 7:15-16 Paul clearly shows here that no matter how closely the violated marriage partner walks with and obeys Christ, there is no guarantee that the unsaved or backslidden (currently “unbelieving”) spouse is going to be saved. Such a perspective is in violation to the divine counsel given here by the apostle Paul and could reveal a false humility in those who attempt to stay with and endure “marriage” to the one who has abandoned them. God never called us to be heroes in this regard and many lives and years have been wasted from receiving un-biblical counsel and by ignorance to this Bible truth. Remarriage is allowed when certain violations have been committed (1 Cor. 7:27-28).
http://www.SafeGuardYourSoul.com
Todd,
I have addressed that very text in another post. There is nothing in the text that makes it clear that the sister being “no longer under bondage” means that she is free to remarry.
Furthermore if your definition was correct we would be calling singleness “bondage” and Paul talks about singleness in rather positive terms.
If you want to disagree with me that is fine, but please tell me why from Scripture. You can’t just throw down a verse and tell me that it means what you think it means and that ends the conversation. I could very well be wrong and if I can be convinced by Scripture that that is so I will gladly change my position. But what I would like to challenge you to do is tell me why from the text or from elsewhere in Scripture men and women are free to remarry after a divorce in certain instances.
I entered into marriage by a threat. When my ex and me were dating, we fought constantly. I was tired of him picking on me. So, I wanted to break it off. He told me that I had better not or he would kill himself and me also. So, I calmed him down by apologizing and taking all the blame. My most concern was thinking he would hurt my mom. Like a stupid teenager, I believed him at his word. And, I married him not knowing God’s law. We weren’t even close to being Christians. I thought on my wedding day, I’d divorce him in a year. After a year, I was pregnant, we were born again (supposedly) and he was called to preach. Things were going great, and I thought maybe things would be different. They were for a little while. But… we always seemed to be in the position that I was always blamed for everything that went wrong in his life. He constantly accused me of cheating. He was very verbally abusive to me and sometimes physical. He was supposed to be a minister of the word??? I took 17 years of his crap. I became depressed and had thoughts of suicide. I prayed for years that God would make my ex husband love me the way he was suppose to. Finally, God showed me that my ex has to choose to love me the way he is suppose to. I was great to my ex. I did everything for him. I never raised my voice at him, unless it was to defend me. I never accused him of anything. I bent over backwards for him. But… he would do nothing for me. And if he did, it came with a price. So, should I have to live that way? Should women that are mentally and physically abused have to live that way? I don’t think so. Although, I do believe that when you get married it is a vow to God and should not be broken. Don’t you think though if a man abuses his wife he has already broken the vows he made? Yes! He did! It goes for a woman. So, because my ex was a jerk to me, I got a divorce and I should live the rest of my life alone when he is remarried? What is worse? You marry a couple that have been divorced or you turn them away knowing that they are already living in adultery? At least if they marry, they have a greater chance of repenting and turning from their wicked way. I am going to remarry. I found a great man I plan on living the rest of my life with. I don’t want to live in adultery, I want to get married, repent, and live the rest of my life for God. Remarriage is not an unforgivable sin, only blaspheming the Holy Ghost. Love covers a multitude of sin.
Drew,
You are not alone. Many Christians are now reexamining what they believe on the MDR issue. I too have come to the belief that marriage is not only “supposed” to be for life, but once God joins two in marriage they ARE married for life in God’s eyes. It matters not what the state says, nor does it matter if they legalize what the Lord has called adultery. I am finding more and more people who are forsaking the legalized relationships the Lord has called adultery. I also find it strange when people say, in regards to leaving adultery—-two wrongs don’t make a right. When one forsakes a relationship God has called adultery, it is not a “wrong”………. Blessings………