Marriage Lesson 8 Faith and Divorce

 Marriage Lesson 8 

Faith and Divorce

 

This lesson also includes the gospel and the divorced. 

 

The Primary objective in this lesson is to address more directly whether or not one may biblically remarry after divorce and to discuss two positions on remarriage…

The Secondary objective is to address more indirectly the biblical grounds for divorce, e.g.,

 

1. adultery, 

2. a non-Christian spouse wanting to leave a Christian spouse, and, 

3. the act of “indecency” which is rooted in the OT.

 

There are many positions that are held on the freedom to remarry either after the death of a spouse or after a divorce.

 

There are as many positions on remarriage as there are people seeking a divorce. Some are more biblical than others and some disregard biblical authority altogether. The spectrum is vast.

Three positions are Prominent:

1. The Permanence View. The view that the Bible does not mandate divorce; thus, divorce should not occur. The Wedding Vows are permanent. The marriage is permanent. Additionally, there is no room for remarriage after a divorce should one take place.

2. The Semi-Permanent View. The view that the Bible permits divorce for two reasons: adultery, and one of the spouses is unsaved and does not want to remain in the marriage. There is one more possibility from the OT, and that is the act of Indecency. More on that later.

3. The Permissive View. the Bible does permit divorce and should one get a divorce on biblical grounds, then one may remarry.

However, we shall address two positions similar to those above, whereas both try to remain within the biblical tension of God’s Word – on this side of heaven, either one may be right, or, one more right than the other. If one were to choose either position, I could not fault them since I believe that both positions have at their heart the desire to honor and please God.

 

Ideally, only one is right, and, at the end of the age, God Himself will reveal, sooth, heal and restore all things to Himself.

 

Position #1

I will entitle:

 

THE BENEVOLENT POINT OF VIEW

Rooted in the OT…

 

No one really knows exactly when or how divorce became appropriated to end the bond of marriage, but it first surfaced in Lev 21.7,14; 22.13; Num 30.9; Deut. 22.19 as a simple matter of fact. Just out of the blue without any grounds.

 

And, then in Deut. 24, the prohibition appears that one cannot remarry the spouse from whom they divorced if one had been remarried after the divorce. 

 

Prior to the entrance of divorce, the adulterer was sentenced to death:

Lev 20:10 ‘If there is a man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, one who commits adultery with his friend’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

 

I believe that the inference here and elsewhere includes sex with anyone other than one’s spouse.

 

But Jesus DOES tell us the reason that divorce was permitted:

 

Mt 19:7 They said to Him, “Why then did Moses’ command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?”

 

Mt 19:8 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.

 

Further, Jesus corrected the Pharisees that Moses did not COMMAND divorce but PERMITTED it. 

 

It was not required or mandated.

 

Adultery was surely the primary reason for divorce, but there was also one more inclusion for divorce… for “Indecency” (Deut 24.1). 

 

The word “indecency” became the catchall for anyone who wanted a divorce and was abused to absurd lengths. 

 

Briefly, the meaning of “Indecency” was literally nudity, or figuratively disgrace, blemish, nakedness, shame, or uncleanness.

 

The act of adultery brought with it the penalty of death. 

In crafty prudence, one may imagine that a person would commit anything just “LESS” than adultery that they would not be caught in a death sentence. This would be “Indecency” and would be subject to the writ of divorce. 

 

In the Old Testament when the spouse commits adultery – the penalty was death. There was no chance to repent. If the spouse was unredeemed, that one is in hell forever. So, then is the innocent party free to remarry? Sure, there was the literal death of the guilty party that ended the marriage. 

 

So, why did divorce transpire and not death for the act of adultery? 

It is surmised that divorce was a merciful concession to the adulterer instead of the sentence of death; thus, because God shows mercy to the guilty, why would He penalize the innocent? 

 

If God permits remarriage where there is death; then in cases of adultery, if God went by the absolute nature of the law, there would always be the possibility of remarriage, right? 

(The implication, then, is that divorce is symbolically equal to a sentence of death of the guilty party; thus, the innocent party is free to remarry since the guilty party has symbolically “died” and the covenant is dissolved – divorce is the death of the marriage bond.)

 

Primarily, God permitted divorce for the innocent party to be free to remarry.

Second, if God allows one to divorce, He allows the guilty person to live in order that that person may have time to repent and be restored to the former spouse and even redeemed…as long as the former spouse has not remarried.

 

The purpose of the divorce, after all, was only to show mercy to the guilty, not to sentence the innocent to lifelong singleness, loneliness, or misery. 

 

And so, the Benevolent Point of View allows remarriage for the innocent party in the case of an adultery that caused a divorce.

 

However, this position does not entertain how long the innocent party must wait for the repentance of the guilty party before remarriage.

 

And should the guilty party repent…to what relationship would one be restored should the former spouse be remarried? Deut. 24 prohibited remarriage under certain conditions.

Nor does it address the possibility of the guilty party to remarry at all after repentance.

 

POINTS TO PONDER……

 

Because He’s gracious to that guilty person, He does not penalize the innocent person to a life of celibacy.

 

He isn’t gracious to one (the adulterer) and makes somebody else pay the price. 

And so, where there are grounds for divorce, there must therefore be grounds for remarriage. 

 

Note: 

 

I have misgivings about some aspects of this position…

 

1. Jesus gives the reason for divorce, and it was because of the hardness of heart…He did not address the issue of remarriage.

 

Nor did He infer that there was any positive purpose for divorce, i.e., mercy for the guilty and freedom for the innocent.

 

There was only a negative inference which was due to the hardness of heart.

 

A Very “STICKY” Note: 

 

2. Simply, if the offending party DOES repent, then, there should be a natural and genuine response to the mercy and grace shown to him by God. It should stir a deep and abiding desire to reconcile with the one whom he transgressed…but, what if it’s too late? What if the innocent party has remarried?

 

If the former spouse exercised the freedom to remarry, then that one seeking reconciliation would create an abysmal “soap opera” for all parties by trespassing into a newly formed union of matrimony. 

 

No former guilty spouse should feel welcome to tread back into the life of the one that was torn apart by him and to violate the sanctity and exclusiveness of the new union. For a thousand reasons, this is wrong.

 

In some degree, this position seems to capture the interaction of a Creator Who is imminent in the woes and sorrows of His beloved but seems to edge away from the grandeur nature of marriage and of a transcendent God and His divine means by which to portray the gospel imperatives embedded in the union of man and woman. 

 

And, since most of this position is rooted in OT Law and not so much the “Law of Christ” …see definition…

 

Definition of the Law of Christ:

The law of Christ might be defined as those prescriptive principles drawn from the example and teaching of Jesus and His apostles (the central demand being love), which are meant to be worked out in specific situations by the guiding influence and empowerment of the Holy Spirit. (1 Cor 9.20-21, Gal 6.2, Rom 7.4)

 

Again, since most of the “Benevolent Position” is rooted in OT Law and not so much the “Law of Christ”, I would like to address the second Position, but with one pause in order to present the pinnacle of faith:

 

I would like to take you to a point of faith.

 

Marriage vows are forever, and marriage is from the mind of God. 

No matter into what difficulties your marriage may stumble, be assured that the God of the universe has willed and provided a way through the most turbulent of times. 

 

He will provide superabundant grace to anyone who turns to Him for the salve of forgiveness and forbearance for your spouse – whether divorced or not. 

 

He will even restore a union of wedlock to those who have become divorced.

He will melt the most stubborn of heart.

 

God will take a “dead” marriage, EVEN a divorced marriage, and give it life when it does not now exist.

Rom 4.17:

“…God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist…”

Rom 4.21:

“and being fully assured that what He had promised, He was able also to perform.”

 

GOD DOES WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE

FOR US TO DO

Position #2 

THE COVENENTAL POINT OF VIEW 

 

Let us go step-by-step into the reasons why I think this position more ably captures the grandeur view of marriage and still addresses the imminent nature of God in the affairs of His beloved. We should always hope to capture God’s transcendence and imminence together.  

 

Piper’s Q&A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0P_Sg6Pqfo

 

What are the elements, that when brought together, create a marriage union between two people? or….

 

What makes two people married?

NOT, “What makes a good marriage?”.

 

There are at least FIVE “Must Have” elements that come together for a union of two people into one. 

 

(SEVEN if you count “one man” and “one woman” …and these days, you must add it)

 

NOTE: Remember that marriage is Universal, it is not American. 

Think big and think World-Wide.

 

ONE MORE NOTE:

 

Those who wear the “I’m Married” T-Shirt, and have been married for years and years, and have never been divorced.…

 

Don’t get any extra “God Points” or credit with God if their marriage is perverse and lost and have not kept their vows at heart. They are only married on paper and in word but not in heart or deed.

 

The repentant heart of the divorcee who lives in passion for Christ is in position for greater showers of blessings than the “marginally” married couple of 50 plus years…

 

SO, the elements, that when brought together, create a marriage union between two people are….

 

ELEMENT #1:

 

A DECLARATION OF CONSENT.

 

In the OT an essential element in marriage is “an intention of the parties to enter into a binding marital union”. This consent had to be given by both parties, the bride as well as the groom. (Gen 24.1-9, 57; 34.1-17)

 

The consent must of course be to marry. A woman who is forced against her will to marry has not really married. In the same way, a woman who has consented to co-habit but is then forced against her will to marry has not married. 

 

In both cases the marriage is void, and for the same reason: consent has been withheld. 

This is why the first question asked in the marriage service is: “Will you have/take this woman/man to be your wife/husband?” to which the response is: “I will”. 

 

This is called the Declaration of Consent. 

 

ELEMENT #2:

 

A BINDING COVENANT – SOLEMN OATH.

 

Marriage [in the Bible] is first and foremost a binding covenant

 

Are the “Marriage Vows” as authoritative as The Bible?”

 

Are the “Standard Wedding Vows” the “Word of God” with Divine Authority, or are they “Just” biblically based concepts written by men?

 

If they aren’t “Scripture”, then what makes them sacred, indissoluble, and authoritative?

 

Or… are they??

 

(Kudos to the very first author of these vows!)

 

I believe that the “Marriage Vows” themselves are not authoritative, but rather, it is The BINDING NATURE OF THESE COVENANTAL Marriage Vows when based on Scripture that swells to biblical authority.

 

Could it be the Marriage “Institution” itself that is sacred and indissoluble… Not the vows?

 

If this is the case, does a divorce “erase” or “un-do” the wedding vows? 

(This we will address a little later)

 

Could I possibly just get married and not say vows? Like at a Justice of the Peace - $60, a license and two witnesses. Is that a marriage?

 

What if in my vows, I said all the standard lines, but included “Exceptions…”? Is that a marriage?

 

“Until Death do us Part…except for adultery; except for these diseases...; except for these offenses...except for these horrible habits...”

 

Let’s take a look at the nature of biblical vows:

 

Biblically, Vows were expressed in a “solemn oath”, most likely spoken at the time of the covenant-making/marriage ceremony.

 

Ezek 16.8: “Then I passed by you and saw you, and behold, you were at the time for love; so I spread My skirt over you and covered your nakedness. I also swore to you and entered into a covenant with you so that you became Mine,” declares the Lord GOD.

 

This was not an oath which could be rescinded at will nor a covenant that could be terminated when desired (Ezek. 16:59–63). 

 

But what if one or both of a couple make a vow with mental reservations? 

 

What if they vow to “take you to be my wife/husband … till death us do part” …

but at the same time think “or until one of us can’t stand the other anymore and we separate”? 

 

It is absolutely clear that all vows must be performed and that the Lord will not ‘release’ a person from a vow even if it is a ‘rash promise’ (Num. 30:6–8). 

 

Ecclesiastes specifically and sternly forbids any escape from vows by the person who protests: ‘My vow was a mistake’ (5:4–7). 

 

Vows are still vows (even if unadvisedly made) 

 

Marriage is the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. 

The exclusive nature of marriage is affirmed in the New Testament, and both consent (‘voluntary’) and permanence (‘for life’) are required by the entire Bible.

 

ELEMENT #3:

 

REQUIRES PUBLIC WITNESS

 

Two people could not simply declare themselves married without any involvement of other people. 

 

OT marriage was a family affair…ratified before the public (witnesses) who would normally be friends and other family members and who would see that the proper social and legal customs of the day were carried out (Gen 34.11f)

 

…and even be involved in checking that the bride was, as she said, a virgin                                       (Deut. 22:13–19). 

 

Human witnesses were essential, as well as the ultimate witness of all marriages: Yahweh himself …

 

Mal 2.14: “Yet you say, ‘For what reason?’ Because the LORD has been a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.

 

ELEMENT #4:

 

SEXUAL UNION

 

Perhaps we are just too cavalier about sex that we treat it as having no gravity anymore. (Friendship Sex/Virginity Sex, Virtual Sex, Oral Sex, Anal Sex…)

The Sexual Act is of Immense Significance!

 

1 Cor 6.15f Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? May it never be!

 

And to drive the point home Paul quotes immediately from Gen 2:24, ‘For it is said: “The two will become one flesh.” 

 

This is certainly saying more than just: two bodies unite. 

It is saying that sex involves the whole person. Again ‘body’ and ‘flesh’ (both used in v16) refer to more than just a person’s physical make-up; they embrace the whole person. 

 

Sexual Union constitutes a unique mode of self-disclosure and self-commitment. 

 

Sex is Only Part of Getting Married

 

Nevertheless, we must not push Paul’s point further than he himself takes it. While it is true that in prostitution the client ‘cleaves’ to the prostitute and ‘becomes one flesh’ with her, it does not mean that he has married her. If it did, Paul could not add: ‘Flee from sexual immorality’ (v18) which in context clearly includes flee from the prostitute(s) with whom you have been consorting.

 

If the Sexual intercourse only encompasses the sexual act, then anyone who has sex with another is simply, getting married.

Thus…there is no sexual immorality, nor adultery.

 

Sexual intercourse is clearly included in both phrases of Genesis 2:24: ‘cleave to his wife’ and ‘they become one flesh’, but as we have already seen, both expressions speak of much more than sexual intercourse alone. 

 

What Paul is saying in v16 is that they are much more deeply involved with the prostitute than they could ever imagine. Certainly, they are not married to her, but they have gone a long way towards the full union that is marriage. 

This misalliance, this extramarital union, would be bad enough for anyone; but it is particularly ugly and morally obnoxious when it involves a Christian’s body, since that body is a member of Christ (15)

 

But can there be de facto marriages when a couple has lived together for many years? Shouldn’t they see themselves as married in the eyes of God? 

“Make her an honest woman”

It may in many cases be right for them to marry (Exod. 22:16f), though not necessarily in every case (1 Cor. 6:12–18).

 

They are living together—precisely because they don’t want to get married; which is nowadays the case with the great majority of co-habiting couples. 

 

They are living together BECAUSE they don’t want to marry.

That is not marriage. 

 

It is paganism.

 

Side Note: How do you answer someone who says, “We’re just living together to see if marriage will work.”

Or… “Noone buys a car without test driving it first”

 

Or… “How will we know if we can stand each other once we are married... Better to find out now before it’s too late.”

 

Since this “living together” thing is not marriage, it is impossible to know if marriage will work by “living together”.

 

Even if you do test drive a car, there is no guarantee that it won’t fail on you after the purchase…or will want to trade it in later. Besides, ones spouse is not a “thing”.

 

Marriage is a permanent relationship that says it will forgive and forbear any differences between the two.

 

When we marry, we don’t know what will happen tomorrow…if we will be poor, or unhealthy, or encounter huge compatibility problems... That is why in our vows we say, “For richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health... Till DEATH do us part!

This vow covers it all.

 

ELEMENTS that Start a Marriage:

 

A Man and a Woman, then, must fulfill four conditions in order to be married: 

1. they must give their voluntary consent to marry this man/woman, 

2. they must promise that the relationship will be permanent, 

3. they must do so in the presence of witnesses, and 

4. they must consummate (or intend to consummate) their marriage in sexual union.

And…...lastly and most significantly... If all the above are present and valid….

 

#5 - FINAL ELEMENT that Starts a Marriage:

 

Such marriages are ‘JOINED TOGETHER BY GOD’ (Mark 10:9/Matt. 19:6). 

This teaching of Christ’s which represents by far the most important event that takes place at marriage, has nothing to do with whether the wedding takes place in church or in a registry office, whether a minister of religion is present or not, whether the couple are Christian believers or atheists. God joins together every couple in every valid marriage. He has been doing so, according to Christ, since ‘the beginning of creation’(Mark 10:5–9; Matt. 19:4–8).

 

“God makes your marriage indissoluble and protects it from every danger that may threaten it from within and without; he will be the guarantor of its indissolubility. It is a blessed thing to know that no power on earth, no temptation, no human frailty can dissolve what God holds together; indeed, anyone who knows that may say confidently: ‘What God has joined together, can no man put asunder.’ Free from all the anxiety that is always a characteristic of love, you can now say to each other with complete and confident assurance: We can never lose each other now; by the will of God, we belong to each other till death.” DIETRICH BONHOEFFER

 

 

Some of the “Go-To” Bible Texts that address marriage and divorce:

Matt 19.3-12

Matt 22.30

Mark 10.1-12

Luke 16.18

Rom 7.1-3

1 Cor 7.1-16, 39-40

Deut 24.1-4

Mal 2.16

 

Read MATTHEW 19:3-12

 

Encourage those who are divorced to stay the course of their wedding vows…

A divorce does not undo the “wedding covenant vows”

 

STAYING SINGLE TO SHOW THE TRUTH 

 

An admonishment to Married Couples…

 

If we are going to stand for marriage as the lifelong commitment to one living spouse, then we must be prepared to love single, divorced people with all our hearts and homes and families. 

 

We must keep a clear, biblical, perspective and remind ourselves repeatedly that compared to eternal life with God, this earthly life—single or married, divorced or not—is very short. James says, “You are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes” (James 4:14). 

 

If a person is going to remain single to honor his or her marriage vows, that perspective will be crucial. 

 

Again…STAYING SINGLE TO SHOW THE TRUTH.

 

What Truth?

 

GOD MAKES AND GOD BREAKS Matt 19.6

 

The ultimate meaning of marriage is to represent the unbreakable covenant-love between Christ and his church (Eph. 5:22–33), then no human being has a right to break a marriage covenant. 

 

When the impossible day comes that Christ breaks his vow, “I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:20), then, on that day, a human being may break his marriage covenant. 

 

This explains why Jesus does not settle for the divorce provision of Deut 24:1–4 (Mark 10:3–9) but says, “What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate” (Mark 10:9). In other words, since God is the One who decisively makes every marriage, only God has the right to break a marriage. And he does it by death. Which is why the traditional and biblical marriage vows have one and only one limitation: 

 

“Till death do us part,” or “As long as we both shall live.”

 

FOUR PRESSING QUESTIONS …

 

1) Does death end a marriage in such a way that it is legitimate for a spouse to remarry?

 

YES, and no one has seriously questioned this. One key text is Rom 7:1–3

Matt. 22:30 

Death is the decisive and eternal end of marriage - after death there is no marriage. 

Plus, there is no way now to reconcile with the other person or to remarry a person who has died.

 

So, should I pray for the death of my former spouse so that I can biblically remarry?

 

Really? Come on…. can you unbiblically pray for something like that for a biblical solution?

 

2) If a divorced person has already married again, should he or she leave the later marriage?

 

Jesus says in Luke 16:18, “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.” 

 

Remarriage, while a divorced spouse is still living, is an act of unfaithfulness to the marriage covenant. 

 

In that sense, to remarry is adultery. We promised, “Till death do us part” because that is what God says marriage is, and even if our spouse breaks his or her covenant vows, we will not break ours. 

 

BUT…

A person who remarries against God’s will, and thus commits adultery in this way, should NOT later break the second marriage. 

The marriage should not have been done, but now that it is done, it should not be undone by man. 

 

Is it a real marriage?

 

Real covenant vows have been made. And that real covenant of marriage may be purified by the blood of Jesus and set apart for God. In other words, a couple who repents and seeks God’s forgiveness and receives his cleansing should not think of their lives as ongoing adultery, even though, in the eyes of Jesus, that’s how the relationship started. There are several reasons that this position may be true: 

 

a.) Deut 24:1–4, where the permission for divorce was given in the law of Moses, it speaks of the divorced woman being “defiled” in the second marriage so that it would be an abomination for her to return to her first husband, even if her second husband died. This language of defilement is similar to Jesus’ language of adultery. 

And yet the second marriage stood. It was defiling in some sense, yet it was valid. 

 

b.) Remarried couples should stay together because when Jesus met the woman of Samaria, he said to her, “You have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband” (John 4:18). When Jesus says, “The one you have now is not your husband,” he seems to imply that the other five were. 

 

Not that it’s right to divorce and marry five times. But the way Jesus speaks of it sounds as though he saw them as real marriages. Illicit. Adulterous to enter into, but real. Valid. 

 

c.) Remarried couples should stay together because even though vows that should not be made, once they are made, should generally be kept. 

There are passages in the Bible that speak of vows being made that should not have been made, but they were right to keep (like Joshua’s vow to the Gibeonites in Joshua 9). God puts a very high value on keeping our word, even when it gets us in trouble (“[The godly man] swears to his own hurt and does not change,” Ps. 15:4). In other words, it would have been more in keeping with God’s revealed will not to remarry, but adding the sin of another covenant-breaking does not please God more. 

 

There are marriages in every church that are second marriages for one or both partners, which, possibly should not have happened, but are today godly marriages—marriages that are clean and holy, and in which forgiven, justified husbands and wives please God by the way they relate to each other. As forgiven, cleansed, Spirit-led followers of Jesus, they are not committing adultery in their marriages. These marriages began as they should not have but have become holy. 

 

So, what about the divorced person who desperately wants to and has been planning their second marriage, who just now hears this? Just now!

 

The quandary – should I just go ahead and keep my plan with the wedding and then presume grace and forgiveness after the wedding since I know it will be sacred after the vows and am presuming God’s blessing?

 

Well, for one thing, one may not claim that they are Spirit-led followers of Jesus right now.

And, secondly, Ro 6:15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!

 

There is one exception to remarrying – and that is if you were a cat. You could marry up to 9 times since you have 9 lives.

 

3) If an unbelieving spouse insists on leaving a believing spouse, what should the believing spouse do? 

 

This text does not teach that we are free to remarry when this happens. Some take the words “In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved” to mean “is free to remarry.” There are several reasons this may notmean one is free to remarry. 

 

a.) When Paul says in verse 15, “In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved [or bound],” he means “not enslaved to stay married when the unbeliever over time insists on leaving and sues for divorce.” 

He’s not saying, “The brother or sister is not enslaved to stay single—and is thus free to remarry,” because Paul, the lover of singleness, would not have spoken of singleness as a state of slavery or bondage. It is very unlikely that Paul would talk like that. 

 

b.)  He is not saying the abandoned spouse is free to remarry because he just pointed us in the opposite direction in verses 10–11: “To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife.” With a statement like that in front of me (“if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband”), I am not inclined to think Paul is supporting remarriage four verses later. 

 

c.)  He is not supporting remarriage when he says “the brother or sister is not enslaved” is because Paul’s argument in the next verse (v. 16) doesn’t support that. It supports freedom to accept divorce peacefully, not freedom to remarry. 

 

…Verse 16 says, “For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” 

In other words, you don’t know, and therefore you can’t use that as an argument to create a fight to stay married. So the words in verse 15, “In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved,” mean you are not enslaved to this marriage when your unbelieving spouse demands out, because you have no assurance that fighting to stay in will save him. 

 

d.)  Paul upholds Jesus’ ideal of no remarriage after divorce while the estranged spouse is alive is verse 39: “A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.” So it seems to me that Paul and Jesus are of one mind that followers of Jesus are “radically” devoted to one husband or one wife as long as they both shall live. This ideal tells the gospel truth most clearly: Christ died for his bride and never forsakes her. 

 

4) Are there no exceptions to the prohibition of remarriage while the spouse is living? 

 

NO. 

But this view is in the minority of biblical students, and even among Bible-believing scholars and pastors. I have tried to give extended biblical foundation for this view in two other places, and so I won’t go into a detailed defense here. We will simply turn briefly to Matthew 19 to address the main argument for lawful divorce and remarriage in cases of adultery. 

 

Example of one who sinned against their spouse; thus, ending the marriage in divorce…how would you know if that person has truly repented of their sinful life?

 

If they don’t remarry and they stay single. 

 

Otherwise, why would they care what God says? They will continue to do what they want.

 

Are there other answers for whether or not one may remarry after divorce? Yes, but be careful about shopping for answers.

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires;

 

Additionally, … “For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?”

What greater evangelistic call could you possibly respond to than to stay and lead your spouse to Christ? What would you say if you thought your evangelistic ministry would improve if you could just leave your unsaved spouse. Who better than you to live out Christ in their presence and for them to see the very power of God.

 

“THE EXCEPTION CLAUSE” 

 

Matt 19:3–12 is very much like the words of Jesus we saw in Mark 10:1–12. There are two main differences. 

 

1. In v9 where there is an exception clause: “And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” 

Most scholars say that the words “except for sexual immorality” mean that if there has been adultery, the aggrieved spouse is free to divorce and remarry. 

 

IS THAT WHAT JESUS MEANT? 

Mt 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows. When His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit.

 

Briefly – Jesus was not speaking of marriage, but betrothal, i.e., Joseph when he thought Mary had committed fornication. He was going to “divorce” her and was free to remarry because he was not yet married to her, only betrothed.

Betrothal is similar to engagement…

 

Jesus does not use the word “adultery” here (when he says “except for sexual immorality”). He does not say “except for adultery,” which is what we would expect him to say if he were referring to adultery. 

 

ADULTERY = Sexual activity when married to another

FORNICATION = Sexual activity outside marriage to anyone

 

He does use the word for adultery elsewhere (Matt. 15:19), and he uses it specifically in distinction to the word he uses here, namely, the word that ordinarily means “fornication” (porneia, see especially John 8:41) when distinguished from adultery. Therefore, I think what Jesus is doing is warning his readers that this absolute prohibition against remarriage does not apply to the situation of betrothal, where fornication may have happened. 

 

In other words, he is saying, “When you hear me give an absolute prohibition of remarriage after divorce, don’t include in that prohibition the divorce of a betrothed couple because of fornication.” 

 

Matthew is the one Gospel that tells about Joseph’s intention to “divorce” his betrothed Mary because he thought she had committed fornication. 

“Her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly” (Matt. 1:19). 

 

The word for “divorce” is the same as in Matthew 19:9. Moreover, Matthew says that Joseph was “just” or “righteous” in resolving to “divorce” Mary. There is no suggestion that Joseph would have been prohibited from marrying someone after “divorcing” Mary in this betrothed situation. 

 

Conclusion… is that in Matthew 19:9, the inspired apostle is showing us that Jesus’ prohibition of remarriage does not apply to Joseph’s kind of situation (Betrothed/Engaged – not Married). 

This view is not widely held. 

 

It seems that the coming of Jesus into the world, and the beginning of the last days, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and the inauguration of the kingdom of God, and the promised presence of the living Christ, and the “radical” nature of his commands point toward an elevation of expectation for his new-covenant people in this crooked and passing world. That is what we pray toward and preach toward. 

 

CHRIST CRUCIFIED FORMS MARRIAGE AND SAVES SINNERS.

 

Agree or disagree concerning the grounds of divorce and remarriage, all must recognize the deepest and highest meaning of marriage—not sexual intimacy, as good as that is, not friendship, not to counter loneliness, or mutual helpfulness, or childbearing, or child-rearing, but the flesh-and-blood display in the world of the covenant-keeping love between Christ and his church. That is what must be pursued in your marriage or your singleness. 

 

It is given to those who follow Christ. We are not left alone. He is with us to help us. If we have been sinned against, he will make it right sooner or later (Rom. 12:19). He will give us the grace to flourish while we wait. And if we have sinned, he will give the grace to repent and receive forgiveness and move forward in what is “radical” to the world… but, “normal” In Christ, which is new obedience. 

 

The gospel of Christ crucified for our sins is the foundation of our lives. Marriage exists to display it. And when marriage breaks down, the gospel is there to forgive and heal and sustain until he comes, or until he calls. 

 

ONE MORE QUESTION ON DIVORCE…

 

This question has been asked by many about divorce and remarriage, and that is:

 

Can a Christian remarry if they divorced while they were non-Christians?

 

The majority of pastors, theologians, and biblical counselors…and even my hero, would say, “YES”.

 

Most refer to -

2 Co 5:17 Therefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.

I, again, take the minority position… “NO”, for the following reasons:

 

I refer back to the very first lesson and ask that you Recall some of the critical points and the Central Theme upon which we started…

 

Is man ever outside of GOD’s Jurisdiction? Christian or Non-Christian?

 

Can man really have his own “Universe” and function without God and not be subject to God’s Natural and Ordained Decrees and Laws?

 

The Institution of Marriage is Sacred, regardless of those who marry, Christian or Non-Christian.

Before the beginning of time, 

before the first man and woman, 

before the first sin of the first man and woman, 

GOD prepared beforehand a way of salvation before there was ever a need for redemption. He planned marriage as a redemptive analogy.

 

If we say, “YES”, a person can be remarried after they were divorced as a non-Christian, then, do we not teeter on saying that every marriage between two un-believers is not really sacred or valid? Is it just a trial run?

 

Might we teeter on the position that we are arbiters of God’s decrees and put under-foot Universal Absolute Truth that existed before time itself?

 

Marriage is a Universal Absolute Institution decreed by the God of Truth before time began.

 

It doesn’t matter whether or not a person is a Christian or Non-Christian, we must have a High View of Marriage because it is the Institution created by God on High.

 

After the FALL, did the marriage of Adam and Eve cease? 

 

NO, nor did the INSTITUTION of marriage cease ….. But it changed forever.

 

Is there a difference between a Marriage and a Christian Marriage?

 

Marriage is not about being happy or starting over, it is about Covenant-Keeping.

 

Marriage is Marriage whether Believer or Un-Believer because of its Source - GOD.

 

Nothing has been said about the effect of marriage on poverty, or health, or employment, or earnings, or the material success of children. 

 

The reason for this omission is not that marriage isn’t significant for these things. It is enormously significant. “Marriage is an issue of paramount importance if we wish to help the most vulnerable members of our society: the poor, minorities, and children.” 

 

Note stats on entitlements, welfare, children out of wedlock. This is our next generation. The attack on marriage…

 

The reason for the omission is different: Focusing on the pragmatic effects of marriage undermines the very power of marriage to achieve the effects we desire 

 

In other words, for the sake of all these beneficial practical effects, we should not focus on them. This is the way life is designed by God to work. Make him and the glory of his Son central, and you get the practical effects thrown in. Make the practical effects central, and you lose both. 

 

Ps 84:11 For the LORD God is a sun and shield; The LORD gives grace and glory; No good thing does He withhold from those who walk uprightly.

 

Mt 6:33 “But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added to you.

 

Of course, there are unbelievers whose marriages last and who prosper materially. But the personal dynamics that hold them together are rooted more deeply in God’s design than they know. They do not look into each other’s eyes and say, “Loving you was a shrewd financial transaction.” 

 

Crass materialism sustains very few marriages. The vestiges of God’s vision for marriage remain. They may be distorted and nameless, but they still remain. God’s common grace grants many cut flowers to flourish for a lifetime. 

 

History of No-fault divorce:

 

In 1969, Governor Ronald Reagan of California made what he later admitted was one of the biggest mistakes of his political life.

 

In the decade and a half that followed, virtually every state in the Union followed California's lead and enacted a no-fault divorce law of its own 

 

This legal transformation was only one of the more visible signs of the divorce revolution then sweeping the United States: From 1960 to 1980, the divorce rate more than doubled — from 9.2 divorces per 1,000 married women to 22.6 divorces per 1,000 married women. 

 

This meant that while less than 20% of couples who married in 1950 ended up divorced, about 50% of couples who married in 1970 did. And approximately half of the children born to married parents in the 1970s saw their parent’s part, compared to only about 11% of those born in the 1950s. 

 

By no-fault divorce, we mean the kind of divorce where to end a marriage one does not need any kind of allegation or proof of fault. With this kind of divorce, you can easily end your marriage legally irrespective of whether your spouse agrees or not to your decision. As of 2010, all the US states except New York has the option for no-fault divorce.

 

The no-fault divorce law was passed in the year 1969. It became into being when the state of California made some laws in 1970 as an alternative to the at-fault divorce law, which was criticized by many. After California, this new divorce law became active in Iowa, Colorado, Florida, Michigan and Oregon. No-fault divorce law soon became popular across the US. 

The main reason behind the popularity of no-fault divorce was it showed a more humane and amicable way for a couple to end their marriage.

 

In 1989, a study was conducted by JUSTEC Research in Virginia where it was found that out of the total divorces happening on no-fault grounds, in four out of five cases, the decision to end the marriage was made by one partner only. This new divorce law allows a party to get a divorce without any solid reason. This ultimately resulted in an increase in divorce rate in the USA by 20 – 25 percent.

 

Marriage is not mainly about prospering economically; it is mainly about displaying the covenant-keeping love between Christ and his church. Knowing Christ is more important than making a living. Treasuring Christ is more important than bearing children. Being united to Christ by faith is a greater source of marital success than perfect sex and double-income prosperity. 

 

If we make secondary things primary, they cease to be secondary and become idolatrous. They have their place. But they are not first, and they are not guaranteed. Life is precarious, and even if it is long by human standards, it is short. “What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes” (James 4:14). “Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring” (Prov. 27:1). 

 

If we make secondary things primary, we will be embittered at the sorrows we must face. But if we set our face to make of marriage mainly what God designed it to be, no sorrows and no calamities can stand in our way. Every one of them will be, not an obstacle to success, but a way to succeed. The beauty of the covenant-keeping love between Christ and his church shines brightest when nothing but Christ can sustain it. 

 

To that end may God give us eyes to see what matters most in this life. 

 

This marriage is a parable. The parable is about Christ and his church. 

To my spouse: “It has been a great honor to take this stage with you. What exalted roles we have been given to play! Someday I will take your hand, and stand on this stage, and make one last bow. The parable will be over, and the everlasting Reality will begin.”