SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Some heavy truth on divorce

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 Next Page )
PosterThread
repentcanada
Member



Joined: 2005/5/9
Posts: 659


 Some heavy truth on divorce

Does the Bible allow for divorce in the case of adultery?

By John Piper January 9, 2009


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following is an edited transcript of the audio.

Does the Bible allow for divorce in the case of adultery?

I don't think so. I don't think the Bible allows divorce and remarriage ever while the spouse is living. That's my radical, crazy, conservative, narrow, hard-nosed, very needed view in our divorce-happy culture.

Does the Bible allow divorce in the case of adultery, even if the adulterer is repentant? Now I suppose that behind this question is Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. Those are the two exception clauses in the New Testament: "If a man divorces a woman, except for _____ [the Greek word here is porneia] and marries another, he makes her commit adultery."

Porneia is sometimes translated as "unchastity," or "immorality." It means most naturally "fornication," which is why I have this bizarre interpretation that very few people follow. I believe that here in Matthew it relates to fornication, that is, sex prior to marriage.

In other words, Jesus is not saying, when he forbids divorce and remarriage, that a sexual sin before marriage should keep you from marrying. And he did that because Joseph and Mary were in that situation in Matthew, which is the book in which these exception clauses occur. At least Joseph thought Mary was in that situation, and so he was going to put her away and not marry her, because he was a just man and didn't want to marry. And Jesus is saying, "I don't have that situation in mind when I forbid divorce."

So I don't think there is an exception for adultery in the New Testament.

But, even if you leave aside all that I have just said here, go to Ephesians 5 where it says, "Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church."

Well, has the church ever committed adultery? Like, daily?

So, how a Christian husband can say to a penitent adultery-committing wife, "You did it, and that breaks it! It's over, and so I'm going to officialize it at the court." I just don't see how any Christian husband can talk or feel that way toward a broken and repentant wife. And I think that even if she isn't broken and repentant that he should wait and wait and pray and pray.

That is a hard teaching.

I read a book one time by Geoffrey Bromiley called God and Marriage, about 120 pages. And it's divided into two sections: The Trinitarian God of the Old Testament and Marriage, and The Trinitarian God of the New Testament and Marriage. And he pointed out that in the Old Testament, every marriage is a rotten marriage. They're all painful. He took every patriarch's marriage and shows how horrible they were.

You've got polygamy involved, you've got Hagar and concubines involved. Every marriage you look at in the Old Testament is horrible! And there is no divorce anywhere in the Old Testament among patriarchs. They all endured. They all gutted it out. But it was just a mess! It was horrible.

And God, ultimately, never divorces his people. There are separations: she goes into exile in Babylon. And you get divorce-type language. You've got to be careful in Jeremiah! It says he gave her a bill of divorcement, but not really. He sent her away and then he went and said, "My heart grows warm for you. I'm taking you back!" And then Hosea illustrates that by going and marrying a prostitute.

It was really quite powerful for me at a certain stage in my marriage to hear Bromiley point out with illustration after illustration how many bad marriages there were in the Old Testament and how none of them ended in divorce.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© Desiring God

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way and do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be approved by Desiring God.

Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: By John Piper. © Desiring God. Website: desiringGod.org

 2009/1/9 21:16Profile
repentcanada
Member



Joined: 2005/5/9
Posts: 659


 Re: Some heavy truth on divorce

brother Piper says this:

Porneia is sometimes translated as "unchastity," or "immorality." It means most naturally "fornication," which is why I have this bizarre interpretation that very few people follow. I believe that here in Matthew it relates to fornication, that is, sex prior to marriage.

I am not so sure why he is so surprised saying "which is why I have this bizarre interpretation that very few people follow." because the NIV, NASB, NKJV, and ESV do not say fornication as the KJV does.

This is a CRITICAL issue in teaching on this passage.

 2009/1/9 21:34Profile
poet
Member



Joined: 2007/2/16
Posts: 231
Longview WA

 Re:

Mark 10:2-12
2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

Luke 16:18
18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

These two scriptures leave no escape clauses for getting out of a covenant marriage between two people before God.

Lets continue.

Romans 7:2-3
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

1Cor7:10-16
10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15 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.
16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

Note verse 15, this is not permitting divorce for the purpose of remarriage, but for peace when there would not be any otherwise.
Especially in cases where the spouse could be in danger.

Now lets remember the two escape clauses found in the book of Matthew's 5 and 19
Theologians agree that this book was written to the Jewish community, thus making sence of the escape clause of "Porneia" being added for reason of divorce.
As jewish custom declared a couple married during the betrothal period while the groom went to prepare a place for her. "his bride"
Jesus eludes to this practice when he tells his disciples that he goes and prepares a place for them and will come back for them, also like a thief in the night, just like the Jewish custom of marriage, the groom would come as a thief and take his betrothed.
If the betrothed committed fornication "porneia" during this engagement period he would have to divorce her, and get a bill of divorcement from the priest. This was called a 'get'.

In matthew Joseph discovered that Mary was with child and wanted to put her away quietly, and get a divorce. Yet they had not come together.

Matthew 1:18-19
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.

So before Joseph could finish preparing a place for his new bride to live and come and take her as his wife and consumate their marriage covenant he found she was being naughty, and was going to divorce her but not the way Deut 24 allowed him too. Very nice of Him...

When studying the bible I have found it interesting reading how other theologians intrepereted scripture, going back to the beginning from the early church fathers up until now, and I discovered something amazing.
What is taught now about divorce and remarriage,
started at the year 1516 and the man responsible is Erasmus. A humanist and bible translator.
Friend of King Henry the 8th.
Who aparently couldnt make an heir son, blaming his wife needed a new translation to get the job done, and when that didnt work he just went into apostacy, and murder.
We all know Tyndale. he is responsible for a book called Practice of the Prelates.
Upon which he denounces Henrys Adulterous behaviour.
The Lord tarried for him to finish his beautiful work on the bible translation:
Then King Henry had him killed for Heresy.
Ironic don't you think?

What are we as christians to do?
Christians are to carry their cross, either be in a relationship that is not desireable, or living in a country that martyrs believers.
Lets be a martyr for Christ in our Marriages.

Even when I didn't deserve my wifes love, she prayed for me and God heard that prayer and saved my soul.

I know this seems harsh, and the implications of what about this situation or that situation?
I think the answer lies in the fact that whatever situation you find yourself in right now, at this moment, you need to say to God, ok lord I may have made mistakes, some knowingly, some because I was misled, or worse lied to.
You can say right now, Lord I will serve you, by being faithful to the spouse IM with right now.
Im no longer going to seperate for another, no matter how hard it gets, im going to pray and trust in you to help me in times of trouble and if it is impossible to stay with the person because they won't stay, then Lord for YOU, I lay my life down and will stay single for your glory and honour, And I pray that this chastened state will give you honour, and may I get my reward for this in heaven.
Amen.



_________________
howard

 2009/1/10 2:43Profile









 Re:

What do you say to the wife who's husband has been having an affair for about a year, while pastoring his church...does she need to stay in that marriage? Obviously nothing is impossible with God and He can restore that marriage. But is that wife so scorned her heart is seared against her husband that reconciliation is not even a thought? This is not a fictitious story...this is what a close friend of mine is going through.

Its always easy for many to spout there opinion about something they don't truly know about, its one thing to minister to couples who are dealing with an unfaithful spouse, but when your the one who is actually going through it, you have quite a different stand. Your emotions are high, pain, sorrow, depression, friends not talking to you anymore, hatred, bitterness flood your mind. Like I said earlier, its not impossible with God.

Not saying I disagree with Piper, and truly hope my friends come to a restoration and get back together, I thing it will take time for them and many others who experience this tragedy of sin to see the light and return to one another.

May the Lord strengthen all of us...

 2009/1/10 7:04
BlazedbyGod
Member



Joined: 2007/8/22
Posts: 462


 Re:

This is indeed an good article, and one of much value-not just the article itself, but everyone's input so far into the thread as well. However, I would just to comment on one thing:

Piper says he belives that this fornication refers to "sex before marriage"-and that could definitely and clearly be seen and understood in the case of Joseph and Mary, in the words of Jesus, I don't see where he is speaking directly pertaining to ONLY prior to marriage though.

Matt 19:9 [color=FF0000]And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.[/color]

In the case of Josepeh and Mary they were engaged, but not yet fully married-it doesn't seem to me that Jesus is speaking of the engagement process, as to his words " his wife"-in the engagement process we cannot say that the bride is actually the husbands wife until they actually get or have gotten married.The Bible says that Mary was Joseph "espoused wife" which means she promised him TO BE his wife, to be given to him in marriage and not another. In Matt 1:19 it says: "Then Joseph her husband, being a just man....: Though it actually says " her husband" this is still in reference to "to become his wife"- in the future. I get this from the definition of the word husband in this verse:"[url=http://classicbst.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=435&version=kjv]"husband" in Matt 1:19[/url] Another reason I say this, is because the Pharisees asked Jesus could a man "put away"(divorce) his wife for every/any cause. Jesus words to me "except it be for fornication" to me, at least at this point, would mean whether it was prior to the marriage or after you have gotten married. Piper spoke of God never divorcing his people in the Old Testament, and he also spoke of The Husband loving his wife as Christ loved the Church-I suppose as to say that he was saying that the Church commits "fornication" and Christ doesn't divorce her-however, the Bible does say to the Church:

1 Cor 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither [b]fornicators[/b], nor idolaters, nor [b]adulterers[/b], nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Rev 2:[color=FF0000]20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, [b]to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication[/b], and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. 21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. 22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. 23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.[/color]

As I understand, both of these verses were written to the Church


Espoused:"[url=http://classicbst.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=3423&version=kjv]"Definition of Espoused"[/url]

Paul Washer speaks a little bit about the purpose of marriage and sticking it out for the Glory of God in his sermon entitled: "Be A Man"

All in all, I am just saying that I do not see anywhere in the scriptures where it exclusively points to or refers to this "act of fornication" HAVING to be PRIOR to marriage ONLY. At best, I would have to say it is permissible on both ends of the stick, but is not a must or a must not in any given situation.

Matt 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

 2009/1/10 14:28Profile
HopeinChrist
Member



Joined: 2005/8/8
Posts: 258


 Re:

Quote:
What do you say to the wife who's husband has been having an affair for about a year, while pastoring his church...does she need to stay in that marriage?



What if this husband/pastor leaves his wife for a time but then repents and comes back to her and she receives him. Then also comes back to the church where he pastored? What if the majority of the congregation welcomes him back with open arms and put steps in place to return him to the pulpit within a matter of months? Can a pastor be restored to leadership after falling into sexual sin? I know he can be restored to faith and fellowship. I know he can be forgiven but can lead God's people again? Biblically?

Question #2- If a husband (different couple, not a pastor) is having an affair and the wife asks him to leave because of it. Is she in the wrong to ask him to leave? From the passages in 1Cor7:10-16 it sounds like she should stay with him even while he is unrepentant and being unfaithful. Any further insight would be helpful. These are not hypothetical questions but questions that have been ripping me apart for most of 2008. I have wanted many times to post something here, seeking counsel but did not want to cause more strife in the first situation if it were to be read by other parties involved.
Blessings.

 2009/1/10 20:58Profile
savannah
Member



Joined: 2008/10/30
Posts: 2265


 Re: Lawful or Unlawful

God's Law on Divorce and Remarriage

A conditional contract (covenant) is one that specifies conditions that both parties must fulfill; and if one party breaks the contract, the wronged party may sue at law for damages or annulment of the contract. By definition marriage contracts are conditional contracts. It was always so in ancient times.

Divorce that is, a complete break in the marriage contract is lawful, because virtually all marriage contracts involve vows made by two parties. In God's marriage to Israel at Mt. Sinai, Israel (the bride) agreed to submit to His authority and obey His laws (Ex. 19:3-8). God, on the other hand, agreed to give them the Kingdom and the blessings of the Birthright. These included honor, protection, sustenance, and children (Gen. 12:1-3).

Israel violated this contract, being incapable of full obedience, and refused to repent; and thus, her Husband divorced her and sent her out of His house. Jeremiah 3:8 says,

And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce, yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also.

Note that God not only sent her away, but only did so after giving her a written bill of divorce. This was in accordance with the law in Deut. 24 that we will quote shortly. Hosea 2:2 also shows that God's divorce meant Israel was no longer God's wife, saying to her,

Contend with your mother [Israel], contend, for she is not my wife, and I am not her husband;

Because God Himself is a divorcee, we can safely say that divorce itself is not necessarily a sin. It can be a sin, of course, if the one demanding a divorce does so with evil motives that are not in the will of God. But the fact that God divorced Israel shows that lawful divorce is the result of sin, or violation of the contract. It is the final solution to the problem when all else fails, and when reconciliation is impossible. God's law on divorce and remarriage is given in Deut. 24:1-4.

1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

From verse 1 we see immediately that God recognizes there must be a cause of divorcement. It is not specified in any detail, other than finding something unclean in her. Some insist that means divorce is only lawful in case of adultery. But the penalty for adultery is death — not divorce.

Others say it means divorce is only lawful if the husband discovers that his wife had had illicit sexual relations with someone else before they were married. However, such a situation also calls for the death penalty, and this is elaborated upon in detail in Deut. 22:13-21.

Thus, the grounds for divorce in the 24th chapter must be something else. Since the grounds are not specified, it would appear that the common law needed no modifying here. Thus, it is helpful to look at the Code of Hammurabi for a list of the grounds for divorce.

The Code specifies cruelty, slander, waste of family assets, and running up needless debts as being grounds for a man to divorce his wife. This is in addition to any other violation that may have been written into the contract.

The wife, too, could divorce her husband for those same offenses, but in addition to them, she could divorce him for lack of support (i.e., food, clothing, and conjugal relations; compare with Exodus 21:10,11.)

We may conclude, then, that these basic grounds for divorce were similar in both law codes, as God's law passes over the question without modification. The primary difference between Hammurabi and Moses is that God takes an interest in the matters of the heart. Hence, even if the outward grounds for divorce appear to exist, there may well be hidden motives and sinful attitudes are against the spirit of the divine law. Such things, in the eyes of God, would make that divorce unlawful.

The divorce PROCEDURE differs in one very important area. Whereas the Code of Hammurabi allows either the man or the woman to divorce the spouse with a verbal statement, God's law demands a written document, the bill of divorcement. Hammurabi was careful to mandate that the marriage contract be written (Par. 128), but divorces were purely verbal. This was bound to cause problems in some cases, so God solved the problem by making divorces written as well. One could easily imagine a situation where a man divorced his wife verbally, whereupon she remarries-only to have her former spouse fly into a fit of jealous rage. He might then deny his verbal divorce and accuse her and her new husband of adultery. Since adultery called for the death penalty, this was a very serious charge.

Justice is safeguarded by the written bill of divorcement, which a divorced wife may produce to prove that her former husband no longer has any claim upon her. It is her security and her license to remarry. For this reason, Deut. 24:2 follows on the heels of verse 1, stating that once she has those divorce papers, she is free to remarry. It is common knowledge among Bible scholars that this was how all the rabbis of ancient times interpreted this divorce law. There was never any question of the lawfulness of divorce. The only problem was their abuse of the divorce law, and this was what Jesus addressed in Matthew 5, as we will see shortly. Divorce and remarriage was lawful, but if she were to remarry without those divorce papers, she would be committing adultery.

Hammurabi's Code had allowed women to remarry if their husbands had been taken captive, so long as the wives had no means of support. Then, if and when he should return from captivity, his wife had to leave the latter husband and any children by him, returning to the former husband. This law attempted to solve a social problem of the day, but just as often, it created further difficulty and heartache.

The system of welfare built into the laws of God provided for the support of a wife whose husband was captivated, so she was not to remarry while her husband was still alive. Thus, his possible homecoming would be a joyous affair, rather than a cause for further grief.

Since the Code did allow remarriage to a former husband in this case, God's law pursues the subject a bit further in Deut. 24:3,4. There, He forbids marriage to a former spouse, at least after she has remarried. This law also shows that God recognizes the validity of the second marriage, as well as the binding nature of the bill of divorcement. Put away does not mean divorce. The term put away generally comes from the Hebrew words shalach (to send away) or garash (to drive away).

The words differ only in intensity. In reference to a husband and wife, it refers to the act of separation, where a man sends his wife out of the house. The term divorce is from the Hebrew word kerithuth. This word refers to the procedure by which the marriage relationship is lawfully terminated. It is used only 4 times in the Old Testament, and each time it is used in the full phrase, bill of divorcement (Deut. 24:1, 3; Isaiah 50:1; Jer. 3:8).

In the New Testament the Greek word for divorce is apostasion. Apo means away from; stasis means standing; established (by law) referring in this case to the written marriage contract. We can see then that the Greek word apostasion signifies more than a mere separation, or putting away. It is the lawful disestablishment of the marriage contract, accomplished by the written bill of divorcement.

There are those who teach that a true divorce is unlawful in the eyes of God, and therefore what we term divorce is realty only a SEPARATION in His eyes. Thus, remarriage would be adultery against the separated spouse. However, as we have seen, the phrase put away refers to lawful separation, while the word divorce refers to the actual lawful termination of the marriage contract. The fact that God allows not only a putting away, but divorce as well shows that it is not a sin to get a divorce, so long as there is just cause to cancel the marriage contract.

God's law states that a bill of divorcement (kerithuth) must always accompany the act of separation, or putting away (shalach or garash). Without such a written document, the act of putting away does NOT constitute a lawful divorce in the eyes of God, and she is not free to remarry.

Thus we see that the two terms are not synonymous, although by law they always were to go together. If the two words meant the same thing, it would not have made sense to talk about putting away and divorcing in the same sentence in Deut. 24:1. This may seem like nitpicking, but this point will take on great importance when we attempt to understand Jesus' words in Matthew 5:32.

Did Jesus Outlaw Divorce?

In Mark 10:2-9 the Pharisees asked Jesus if it were lawful to put away one's wife. Jesus asked them in turn what Moses had said. They answered that Moses had commanded them to write a bill of divorcement and to put her away. Jesus then replied, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. He went on to explain that divorce did not follow the perfect order of creation that was set up at the beginning. In other words, divorce is not a good thing, but because men's hearts are hard, it is necessary that provision be made for handling broken marriage contracts. For the same reason, God instituted the death penalty for first-degree murder. From the beginning it was not so, for God created us to live together in harmony. But for the hardness of men's hearts, it became a very necessary judgment to curb such violent crime.

The fact is, ALL LAWS exist only because of the hard-ness of men's hearts. If all men were perfect, there would be no need for laws, for the laws would be written in our hearts. We would be totally incorruptible. Paul wrote in 1 Tim. 1:9, the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient. Thus, so long as there are unrighteous men on the earth, the law must remain in effect, in order that we may have some restraint on men's lusts and wickedness. We conclude, then, that in order to govern men justly in the present state of affairs, God's laws on divorce are absolutely necessary prior to the time that men come fully under the New Covenant and are no longer lawless. Divorce, therefore, should not be necessary among Christians. However, Christians, too, are often lawless and disobedient to the perfect will of God. For this reason divorce provisions are necessary even for Christians.

When a marriage contract has been broken, and especially if one or both parties refuse to repent and restore the lawful order, divorce may well be the only solution. God does not expect the innocent party to honor the contract when the guilty party refuses to do so. The contract is always conditional. Thus, Jesus' statement, For the hardness of your heart, should not be construed to mean that divorce itself is a sin. Remember that God Himself is a divorcee, according to Jer. 3:8, yet He did not sin in divorcing Israel.

Nor must we believe that the people twisted God's arm and forced Him to allow divorce. If divorce were a sin, and God allowed it, then God was legalizing sin. This would be a serious accusation for mortals to make, especially in view of the testimony of David in Psalm 19:7 that The law of the Lord is PERFECT, converting the soul.

Did Jesus Outlaw Remarriage After Divorce?

Matthew 5:31, 32 is by far the most important passage used by most people to prove that remarriage after divorce is adultery. It reads:

31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement;
32 But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery; and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

As interpreted by the King James translation, it would appear that Jesus positively condemned divorce and remarriage, thus showing God's law to be inferior to divine moral standards. If divorce indeed causes one to commit adultery, then divorce itself would be a sin, according to God's law of liability. Remarriage, too, would constitute adultery. However, as we will show, neither is a sin.

First of all, this passage is a part of His Sermon on the Mount, which is for the most part a commentary on Bible law. In verses 17-19 He disclaimed the idea that He was trying to destroy or undermine the law. Further, He positively condemned those who would break the shortest commandment and teach others to do so. From this alone it should be clear that Jesus did not abolish God's laws on divorce and remarriage.

Then in verse 20 Jesus said that our righteousness must EXCEED that of the Scribes and Pharisees. With that in mind, He began to give us examples of Bible law to show how they fell short of the law's righteous standard. They did not keep the true spirit of the law and misinterpreted it in many ways.

1.Thou shalt not kill (vs. 21-26)

2.Thou shalt not commit adultery (vs. 27-32)

3.Thou shalt not bear false witness (vs. 33-37)

4.An eye for an eye (vs. 38-42)

5.Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (vs. 43-48)

In each case the law in question is introduced with the following format: It has been said (interpreted in the synagogue). . . but I say unto you. . . This is not to be construed to mean that Jesus is putting away all of these divine laws, or that He is replacing each of them with something different or better. It is not the law of God He is discrediting; it is the Pharisaical interpretation of the law and a legalistic spirit that He is disagreeing with. In other words, Jesus did NOT put away the law on murder when He said, Thou shalt not kill. . . but I say unto you. . . . Nor did He make it lawful to commit adultery, so long as you don't look upon another woman with lust while you do it.

In a nutshell, then, the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount was to improve upon the law's interpretation and application. The true spirit of the law had been lost through the traditions of the elders.

With that context in mind, and knowing that Jesus did not destroy the law, let us look at Matthew 5:31, 32 in greater detail. These two verses are a part of His comment on Thou shalt not commit adultery, so the final thrust of His comment is to define adultery in relation to the laws of divorce and remarriage. Verse 31 simply refers to Deut. 24:1, where God demanded that men give their wives a WRITTEN bill of divorcement before they could lawfully put away their wives. Verse 2, of course, allowed divorced wives to remarry after a lawful divorce. So let us take another look at Matthew 5:31, 32, inserting a few key words in the original Greek, so that we get a proper translation of the passage.

31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away (apoluo) his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement (apostasion).
32 But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away (apoluo) his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery; and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced (apoluo, lit. put away) committeth adultery.

To paraphrase this: The law says that she commits adultery if she remarries without a written bill of divorcement. BUT I SAY UNTO YOU that whoever puts her away (without divorce papers; that is, unlawfully) causes her to commit adultery (if she remarries under such conditions). Thus, he who simply put her out of his house without divorcing her properly is JUST AS LIABLE AS SHE IS. And whosoever marries her that has been put away (without divorce papers) also commits adultery, because he is marrying another man's wife.

Jesus is here condemning men who put away their wives Babylonian style (verbally), instead of putting them away in the manner prescribed by God's law. Under the laws of liability, this would make him guilty of adultery if she were to remarry. So we see that the whole point of this commentary is to bring out a point of law that had not been covered by the Pharisees in their interpretations.

But what of the phrase, saving for the cause of fornication? What does this mean? Most people assume it means that if a wife commits adultery, then it is lawful to divorce her. However, it does NOT say, except for the cause of ADULTERY. Further, the penalty for adultery was death-not divorce. So what is meant by fornication? Why is it alright to put away one's spouse without divorce papers in a case of fornication?

The Meaning of Fornication

The most common type of fornication is prostitution (Ex. 22:16). This is where a man has sexual relations with an unmarried woman. The solution is either to get married (Ex. 22:16, 17) or separate (repent and stop doing it). However, the word also covers other forms of unlawful sexual relations. In Hebrews 12:16 Esau is called a fornicator ; yet there is no record in Scripture of his buying the services of a prostitute. But Genesis 26:34 does say that he married Hittite wives. From the account in Scripture, this obviously went against God's command not to take a wife from among the Canaanites. Thus, it may be classified as an unlawful marriage.

We find the term fornication used again in 1 Cor. 5:1. 1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. Thus we see that Paul uses the term fornication to describe another unlawful marriage or sexual relationship that had been forbidden in Leviticus 18:7, 8, namely, incest.

In Jude 7 we read of the people of Sodom and Gomorrha who had given themselves over to fornication, going after strange flesh. This, too, is obviously a sexual sin, and yet the only thing we have on record of their sexual tendencies is homosexuality, or sodomy (Gen. 19:4-8). Each of these examples have one thing in common: they are unlawful sexual relationships, and therefore, there is no LAWFUL marriage contract to bind the two parties together. In other words God does not recognize the marriage in the first place. It is void from the start.

Thus, when Jesus says it is alright to put away (separate without divorce papers) one's spouse in the case of fornication, the reason is quite obvious. There was no lawfully-binding marriage contract in the first place, so how can one appeal to the law of God to have it voided? God requires no such divorce papers. However, if the couple had obtained a marriage license from a humanist government such as those of this world order, then they would have to petition it for a divorce as well, because humanist governments recognize many marriage relationships that God's law does not. God does not recognize relationships which are homosexual, incestual, or otherwise forbidden as in the case of Esau, even if the parties sign a marriage contract. Another case where divorce papers are unnecessary is in the case of prostitution. Since prostitutes do not enter marriage contracts with a client, the solution is separation, not divorce.

Did Paul Ban Remarriage After Divorce?

Since some have been taught that Paul banned remarriage in 1 Cor. 7:10,11, we shall study this passage to show that Paul actually wrote that remarriage is NOT a sin.

10 And unto the married. . . let not the wife depart (chorizo) from her husband;
11 But and if she depart (chorizo), let her remain unmarried (agamos), or let her be reconciled to her husband; and let not the husband put away (aphiemi, to dismiss) his wife.
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord; if any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

At first glance it might appear that Paul is speaking of divorce and remarriage. However, the word apostasion does not appear here, since he is not discussing divorce, but rather the problem of separation, as we see from verse 1.

1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

Thus, the subject of this discussion is whether or not to abstain from sexual relations and marriage itself. Apparently, Paul had previously taught them that it is good for a man not to touch a woman, but the Corinthian church had misinterpreted it to mean that sexual relations prevented Christians from attaining to a truly spiritual life. Thus, the young people were being discouraged from marrying, and some of the married couples were even separating.

So here, Paul corrects their error. He had told them that it was good not to marry, it is true, but NOT because marriage itself was a sin or a hindrance to one's personal relationship to God. Rather, it was because of two things: (1) the present distress discussed in verse 26; and (2) to be able to devote more time and energy to spreading the Gospel (vs. 32-35). In those days a man never knew if he were going to be imprisoned or executed and his family with him. So because of the dangerous political climate, it may have been a good idea not to marry, if a person could bear the incontinence. And, of course, it is quite certain that Paul himself could not have traveled as he did, if he had been married and had had to support a family. Thus, it was an advantage to him and to others like him to remain unmarried so long as they had the gift of continence.

In verse 5 Paul makes it clear that it was not right for married couples to separate, or even to abstain from normal sexual relations, except during times of prayer and fasting. (People lose most sexual desire during fasts anyway.) In verses 7-9 he tells unmarried people that if they can take a life of celibacy, they may do so; but if they do NOT have that gift, it is better to marry than to burn (with lust).

Regarding the same subject, Paul then turns his attention to married couples and especially to those couples who had already separated, thinking this was the spiritual thing to do. Paul's verdict is, Let not the wife separate (chorizo) from her husband in verse 10. But if she does not heed his advice here, Paul says she must remain agamos, or be reconciled to her husband. Most people are taught this means the wife should not divorce her husband, but if she does, she must remain single for the rest of her life, or else come back and remarry her former husband. However, as the context shows, this passage is referring to the problem of separation, rather than to divorce. The Greek word apostasion is not used here. The word translated unmarried is agamos, the negative form of gamos. Gamos sometimes refers to the STATE of being married, but it usually refers to the occasion when the marriage contract is put into effect that is, the ACT OF GETTING MARRIED.

Agamos, then, being the negative form of the word gamos, can mean either: (1) the unmarried STATE, or (2) the ACT of not drawing up a marriage contract with someone. The way it is translated in the King James version, verse 11 is assumed to mean, let her remain in the unmarried STATE. However, it is more likely to mean, Let her not get married to anyone else, since she is only separated from her husband. So if we were to paraphrase this passage, we would see that Paul is saying, let not the wife separate from her husband, thinking that this is pleasing to God. But if she does, she should not get married to anyone else, because she is still under contract with her original husband. Later in this same chapter, Paul does deal with the question of divorce and remarriage.

He does not use the technical words for divorce and remarriage, but rather the descriptive terms, bound and loosed. To be bound by law means to be married by contract; to be loosed means to be loosed from that contract (i.e., divorced or widowed). 1 Cor. 7:27, 28 reads:

27 Art thou bound (by law) unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed (from the bonds of marriage). Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife.
28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned.

Few verses are plainer than these. If you are married, do not seek a divorce. If you are divorced or widowed, do not seek a wife (because of the present distress mentioned in verse 26). But if you do marry, YOU HAVE NOT SINNED; and if a virgin marry, she has not sinned either. In other words, Paul says, remarriage after a divorce is NOT a sin. Thus, divorce and remarriage is NOT adultery.

The Three Premises of This Study

For those who honestly dispute this conclusion,I offer some suggestions here. All logical conclusions are only as true as their premises. This particular study rests upon the following three premises:

1. Marriage is a conditional contract. We showed that God married Israel at Mt. Sinai and treated Israel as a married wife, until He divorced her (Jeremiah 3:8) for insubordination and disobedience. If marriage were unconditional, then God could not have divorced her without tainting Himself with sin. Therefore, it must have been conditional.

2. Put away is distinct from divorce. We showed how the law mandates that a man must give his wife divorce papers before putting her away. One is the legal act of terminating the marriage; the other is the act of sending her away.

3. God's law was not abolished. Jesus said this in Matthew 5:17-19, Paul said this in Romans 3:31, and John defines sin in terms of violation of God's law in 1 John 3:4.

You may disagree with some minor parts of this study, and that is your privilege. But if you find these three premises to be true, then you must agree that remarriage after divorce is not adultery.

S.E. Jones

 2009/1/10 22:08Profile









 Re:

Quote:
What if this husband/pastor leaves his wife for a time but then repents and comes back to her and she receives him. Then also comes back to the church where he pastored? What if the majority of the congregation welcomes him back with open arms and put steps in place to return him to the pulpit within a matter of months? Can a pastor be restored to leadership after falling into sexual sin? I know he can be restored to faith and fellowship. I know he can be forgiven but can lead God's people again? Biblically?



I think that it is possible with God to restore the marriage. I so hope that my friends will return to one another. I do believe time can heal this, my concern is people in there lifes giving them unfruitful advice. The sad thing is that most Christians do not take Galatians 6:1-3 to heart. I believe God can restore the marriage, if both want it. I do believe that he can be restored to the ministry, maybe not a pastor role, but a leadership role. Honestly I am undecided whether he can pastor a church or not. Both view points are valid. But, what if his kids and wife are un ruling? What if he can't keep his house in order...would that not disqualify him too?

A true story I have heard about a husband and wife who separated because the husband was unfaithful. The other woman lived in the same neighborhood of the other woman and the wife would always the leave the front porch light on. She told the husband I will leave this light on to let you know that when you are ready to come back home, I am here to receive you back. Now he had to drive by the his house to go to the other woman's house and would always see that light on and would grieve him. Short story long he left that other woman and returned to his wife, God restored there marriage 10 fold.

 2009/1/11 12:08









 Re:

Quote:
I believe that here in Matthew it relates to fornication, that is, sex prior to marriage.

How can fornication be sex before marriage, when having sex marries you? Standing before a minister is not the act of "getting married". That ceremony is just a recognition for the community to know that this man belongs to this woman and this woman belongs to this man, all other men and women are hands off.

Paul even confirms this when he writes, 1 Corinthians 6:16 Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

 2009/1/11 12:42









 Re:

Reformer wrote:

Quote:
I think that it is possible with God to restore the marriage. I so hope that my friends will return to one another. I do believe time can heal this, my concern is people in there lives giving them unfruitful advice. The sad thing is that most Christians do not take Galatians 6:1-3 to heart. I believe God can restore the marriage, if both want it. I do believe that he can be restored to the ministry, maybe not a pastor role, but a leadership role. Honestly I am undecided whether he can pastor a church or not.

Sometime ago a Pastor was seeing his brothers wife (the brother plays the piano at the church). She was the secretary. And he lived about 100 miles away from the church so at times he'd stay a week at the church since his work was also in the same city. So you can see already the trap that was being set. A man stays away from his wife too long and then you have a pretty woman hanging around the office, one thing probably led to another and WHAM, they take off. The brother divorces her and remarries. The Pastor seems to have flaunted his decision and still praises God without any remorse. Both sides had kids but they seem to be doing okay, and the wife of the Pastor is devastated. And now the Piano player is pastoring the church.

Now, automatically one would think that the Pastor will never pastor again. I have to disagree. I KNOW him, I know that he is caught in the deceitfulness of sin. And when his eyes are open to what happened, he'll come around. It took about a year for King David to realize what he had done and it took Nathan the prophet to expose him. But David remained the anointed King of Israel but with a price tag attached.

My Pastor friend in whom I love in Christ, will come out of this I am sure of that and will go back to Pastoring but this time it will come at a cost, because the gifts and callings are truly without repentance. You can't rue the run.

 2009/1/11 13:03





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy