MARRIAGE, DIVORCE, REMARRIAGE: WHAT DOES THE BIBLE ALLOW?
Copyright © 2000-2002 Zenith Harris Merrill
Throughout Scripture, whenever legitimate divorce occurs, remarriage is assumed. Where divorce is permitted, remarriage is permitted. Just as the widow or widower in Romans 7:3 is no longer "joined" or bound, following the death of their husband or wife, a believer is also no longer bound, not under bondage (1 Co 7:15-16) and is free to remarry. To interpret these passages any other way is to surrender the inerrancy of Scripture.
In spite of this, the harsh dictates forthcoming from much of the professing Church, the body of Jesus Christ, since "He ascended to His Father and Our Father" had decreed otherwise, choosing on this subject, more than any other, to misunderstand and/or pervert God's Words. Dr. John F. MacArthur is a conservative, evangelical, Christian minister and best selling author, heard daily on the national radio program "Grace to You," who, before becoming the author and general editor of The MacArthur Study Bible, studied Scripture for 30 hours weekly, for thirty (30) years.
In the MacArthur Study Bible (NKJV), Dr. MacArthur has the following footnote to Matthew 19:9
Matthew 19:9: "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced [unjustly] commits adultery."
Dr. MacArthur's Footnote: "Sexual immorality (a more correct literal interpretation of the original Greek text than "adultery" is a term that encompasses all sorts of sexual sins including homosexuality, beastiality and even an addiction to pornography. Both here and in Matthew 5:32, Jesus includes this "exception clause," clearly permitting the innocent party in such a divorce to remarry without incurring the stigma of one who "commits adultery."
The above information is also noted in the KJV Open Bible published by Nelson
Key Greek words in this study are:
1) Sexual immorality or Illicit sex, based on the Greek word porneia in Matthew 19:9 and Matthew 5:32, is also the word from which pornography is derived. The meaning includes incest, prostitution, homosexuality, beastiality and any other form of sexual perversion.
2) Adultery, from the Greek word moicheia, used in Matthew 19:9, specifically to describe adultery,
3) Dedoulotai, the Greek verb from 1 Corinthians 7:15 means is "not bound," and Paul clearly means the abandoned believer is unmarried and is free to remarry.
Dr. Larry O. Richards, before turning to writing fulltime, was a former professor at WheatonCollege where he authored textbooks widely used in Christian education. He has written over one hundred books, including the Expository Dictionary of Bible Words, The Teacher's Commentary and the Revell Essential Bible Dictionary, and he authored the notes for the bestselling Adventure Bible.
Following are comments of Dr. Richards from the book, Marriage and Divorce, p.236-237, edited by H. Wayne House, former assistant professor of systematic theology at Dallas Theological Seminary and presently Academic Dean and Professor of Theology at Western Baptist College, Salem, Oregon:
"It seems to me that much of the church has set about deliberately to withhold awareness of God's compassion and forgiveness from those who divorce and remarry. It is almost as if the church is determined to punish divorce as Scripture's true unforgivable sin.
"A divorced or remarried person can attend and put money in the offering plate. They can listen to our preaching and send their children to Sunday School. But no divorced or remarried person can participate fully in the life of the church. For such a person has sinned.
"How strange! We would invite a converted murderer to give testimony from our pulpits. Yet we will not permit a person who has been divorced and has remarried to praise God in our choir.
"It pains me deeply to say this, and I say it humbly with an overwhelming awareness of my own faults and flaws. But, dear brother and sister - you who set up rules for who can and who cannot divorce and remarry, you who refuse those who divorce or remarry in violation of your criteria the opportunity to serve in your church. You who refuse to marry in your church those who wish to begin a new life together by committing themselves to one another before God - you unjustly sin against Christ's little ones and do violence to the spirit of the Gospel. I appeal to you to come again to the Word of God. Trace the argument of each passage from which you draw your texts. And with an open mind, ask the Holy Spirit to be your guide."
A study of the most common interpretations of those Scriptures which have provided guidelines governing Matrimony and/or Divorce within Christianity throughout the last 2,000 years, however, leaves the firm conviction that "the doctrines of Christianity" have been driven by those who have forsaken the natural meaning, i.e., "common sense" principle of Biblical hermeneutics - to the detriment of households containing deserted, destitute and forsaken Christian wives and children, who have been forced to either forego the presence of a husband/father figure in the home because the right to remarry has been forbidden, or to choose remarriage anyway and be deprived of their (earthly) membership and fellowship within the ecclesia, their congregation of "called out" ones (by God) who compose the local body of Christ.
Jesus discussed marriage and divorce four times: Matthew 5:31-32, Matthew 19:3-12, Luke 16:18 and Mark 10:10-12, which speaks as do Matthew 5 and Matthew 19, but without recording the exception of adultery for which divorce is allowed, which Jesus had quoted. The omission in Mark in no way invalidates Matthew's inerrancy, for two out of three times, He had specifically permitted divorce and remarriage for adultery, "lest" he causes his wife to commit adultery. It is obvious that it is assumed the wife will remarry.
The only way to change the clear meaning of these passages is to look at them with a presupposition, or to view marriage as sacramental, as Roman Catholicism does, and because the heirarchy of Roman Catholicism ignores Scripture, preferring instead, their own man-made traditions, agreement with them is not a good place for a Bible believing, born-again individual or their church to be, or even to aspire toward.
God declared in Malachi 2:13-16, that He hated chorizo interpreted divorce, but literally meaning to "leave" and aphiemi to "send away." This reference is to older men leaving their faithful, older wives who were married in their youth, and have provided life long companionship, for younger, beautiful, pagan women. In a following verse of this passage He said He hated a man covering his skirt (wife) with violence.
The above passage in Malachi, however; obviously must be taken in the context of those to whom the Lord God addressed it. It was not meant to be a blanket statement governing all divorce, for in Ezra 10:10-19, God had specificially ordered the Israelites to divorce their foreign pagan wives because it was, spiritually, at the time, the lesser of two evils.
Corinth, in the first century, was a city whose situation was unique in the New Testament world for it had a reputation for evil which was widely known. To the rest of the biblical world, "to corinthianize" literally meant to fornicate. The Temple of the Goddess of Love, Aphrodite, built high above the city, had 1,000 TempleProstitutes who came down into Corinth each night, with their well known mark of an uncovered head, to ply their trade.
Because of this, Paul directed the Christian women in Corinth to keep their heads covered as "respectible" women, in order that they not be mistaken for temple prostitutes.
He said this in no other epistle other than to the women in Corinth, yet for 2,000 years it has been taken out of the context in which it was written, and presented to all Christian women as a necessary ritual.
All of the ancient pagan Mystery Religions were well represented at Corinth. The Temple to Apollo at Delphi was directly across the bay, where the oracles from the gods were received by the Priestess of Delphi as she functioned as a medium, while in a trance state of altered consciousness. She then delivered the message to her petitioners in an unearthly babbling tongue which no one could interpret.
Worshippers of the Magna Mater, (Great Mother) Cybele, behaved in much the same way, imitating God's gifts for the Christian church, including tongues, with Satanic imitations.
Having come out of these false occultic religions, the new Christians had partaken of these evil and corrupt worship practices of Corinth in the past, and Paul's letter to them shed light on the culture and customs of the time in which Paul wrote his instructions on marriage and divorce to the members of the young Christian Church at Corinth, in 1 Corinthians, 7th Chapter. Unless we know "to whom" the passage is addressed and the culture and circumstances, we can't understand the meaning of what is being said as it was understood by the original listeners.
The answers Paul gave the Corinthians in Chapter 7 of 1 Corinthians were to the serious marital trouble which Corinth's pagan and morally corrupt society and their inability to separate themselves from the prevaling cultural surroundings had created for the new believers in the Corinth church.
Their society was sexually even more perverted than our own is today, although we're rapidly gaining on them, for they tolerated fornication, adultery, homosexuality, polygamy, and concubinage. According to the Roman poet Juvenal (60-140 A.D) many women had rejected their own sex, taken to wearing helmets, delighting in feats of strength, and with exposed breasts, hunting pigs with spears, and having completely "worn out" their wedding veils, for some had been married as many as twenty times.
Among the population of Corinth, four types of marriage were recognized:
1) contubernium, meaning "tent companionship" which was an arrangement between slaves which lasted only as long as their owner permitted, as the slaves were completely without rights.
2) usus, a form of common law marriage recognizing a couple to be husband and wife after they had lived together for a year.
3) coemptio in manum, in which a father would sell his daughter to a prospective husband.
4) confarreatio, on which the modern Christian marrige ceremony is based as it was adopted by the Roman Catholic church and used with certain Christian modifications, coming into Protestantism through the Reformation, with very few changes. The original ceremony involved participation by both families in the arrgenements for the wedding, a matron to accomany the bride and a man to accompany the groom, exchanging of vows, the wearing of a veil by the bride, the giving of a ring (placed on the third finger of the left hand), a bridal bouquet, and a wedding cake.
In the Roman empire of Paul's day, divorce was so common, even among those who married under the confarreatio, it was quite possible for men and women to have been married twenty (20) or more times. There was a strong feminist movement. Many women competed with their husbands in business and athletic powess. Childless marriages were common at the end of the first century, as both marriage partners were too busy doing their own thing - and homosexuality was so prevalant that 14 of the last 15 Roman Emperors had been homosexuals. As our culture recedes backward, will we again approximate this evil?
The early Corinth church had members who lived together, and were still living together, under all four marriage arrangements. It also had members who had had multiple marriages and divorces. Some believers had gotten the idea that it was more spiritual to be single and celibate than to be married, perhaps, as a form of early gnosticism, and they taught that sex was "unspiritual" and to be completely forsaken.
Paul addressed the chaos of marital possibilities which posed multiple questions for these immature Christians in a situation which would have confused mature Christians.
Although Christians today often seem to view being single as a "second class" condition, Paul acknowledged that singleness was good, honorable and excellent, although not supporting the claim by some, that it was spiritually superior to marriage in God's eyes. God intends for marriage to be permanent. His original plan for marriage did not allow for divorce or for celibacy.
According to 1 Corinthians:7:l2-17, Christians are not to forsake their unbelieving spouses. Paul also said it would be wrong for married Christians to live as if they were single, becoming celibate while married. However, a few verses later, Paul says that if the unbelieving partner leaves, let him. This is written not as a concession, but as a command. In this case, the believing partner is freed of the marriage bond and allowed to remarry.
In verses 8-16 of 1 Corinthians, Chapter 7, Paul applied the basic truth that marriage is the norm for Christians but that singleness as a special gift of God is also good, speaking to all four groups of believers:
1) those who were formerly married
2) those who are married to believers
3) those who are married to unbelievers and who want to remain married
4) those who are married to unbelievers and who want to leave the marriage.
These verses answer the question, "Should those who were married and divorced before becoming Christians remarry?"
In the first situation above, God offers those formerly married the option of remarrying, if the new partner is a believer. In the other three circumstances, His answer is no, they should remain in the marriage.
The term unmarried agamos, is used only four times in the New Testament, and all four are in this chapter of 1 Corinthians: 7. Verse 32 simply uses it in a way that refers to a person who is not married. Verse 8 speaks to "the unmarried and to widows," but the clearest insight to "unmarried" is in verses 10 and 11, "the wife should not leave (divorce) her husband (but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried while an attempt is made to reconcile..)." If the unbelieving spouse refuses to return, she is then free (not bound) and may remarry. The term unmarried indicates those who were previously married, but are not widows, people who are now single, but are not virgins. The unmarried woman, spoken of here therefore, is a divorced woman.
In 1 Corinthians 7:15-16, Paul tells Christians they should not even try to stop an unbelieving spouse from leaving. "If the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave." The brother or sister is not under bondage in such a case. In God's sight, the bond between a husband and wife is dissolved only by death, (Romans 7:2), adultery (Matthew 19:9), and/or desertion, which is an unbeliever's leaving the marriage. When the bond, or bondage is broken, a Christian is free to remarry.
Obviously, if he were not free to remarry, he would still be bound (in bondage) because he would have legal restrictions placed upon him. If one is divorced, he is not married. If he is not married, he is free to remarry.
In addition, when Paul says to "let them separate," the Greek terms Choristhenai (separate oneself, be separated) and aphienai (send away, cancel) were both commonly used of "divorce" in New Testament times, so by "separate" Paul meant to divorce.
Jesus' definitive statement on the subject of divorce and remarriage is in a passage of verses found in Matthew 19:3-12. His preeminent statement is both simple and clear, as He answers a specific inquiry in verse 3, regarding the will of God on this subject, from a Pharisee, "Is it acceptable for a man to divorce his wife for any reason?" A more accurate translation of this question from the Greek is: "Is it acceptable for a man to divorce his wife for any Offense?" The Pharisee's question was based on Deuteronomy 24:1-4 where God had commanded that if men divorced their wife, they must provide her a written "bill of divorcement," lest she be accused of adultery when she remarried, and also lest any man who then married the wife who had been unjustly put away or divorced, would be forced into the position of appearing to commit adultery.
Jesus was not instituting a new or stricter law or mode of behavior, as some theologians have claimed, but He was reiterating God's grace in allowing His people to deviate from His standard of perfection in specific circumstances. Jesus' answer certainly should govern all believing Christians, and in Matthew 19:9, He said:
"I say to you that whoever divorces his wife except for fornication and marries another commits adultery."
The presupposition that one will remarry is obvious. The grammar and syntax of this verse are simple and in no way unusual. The only difficulty and/or complexity that has been brought to bear upon this verse is one which has been imposed not by God, but by the church, by a myriad of interpreters throughout the centuries, in their attempt - motivated by their own presuppositions - to demonstrate that the verse cannot actually teach a genuine exception to a "no divorce law," .
The English translation of Matthew 19:9: "whoever divorces his wife except for fornication and marries another commits adultery and he who marries a wife who was put away, other than for adultery commits adultery." (NIV) accurately gives a precise rendition of the original statement in the Greek text.
The Interlinear Hebrew/Greek/English Bible, edited and translated by Jay P. Green, Sr., and published by Hendrickson, in the literal translation of the Greek to English says this:
Matthew 19:9: I say to you that whoever puts away the wife of him, if not for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery and he her put away marrying commits adultery.
There is absolutely nothing strange or complex in Matthew 19:9 which would justify an abnormal approach to interpreting it, and apart from the invalid presupposition that it cannot possibly allow for divorce and remarriage, no one should have difficulty in understanding the meaning of the verse.
Many Theologians and Biblical scholars who do allow for divorce based on the exception stated in Matthew 19:9 then violate the clear meaning of the verse by their argument, in contradiction of the verse, that no one is ever allowed to remarry.
It is impossible to grammatically interpret this verse in such a way that it allows for some to divorce because of adultery by their mate, and yet denies them the right to remarry.
The main verb in verse nine is "commits adultery." The subject of this verb, the one who commits adultery, is described by the relative clause "whoever divorces his wife except for fornication and marries another."
The person who divorces his wife "except for fornication" is the same individual who also "marries another" since both verbs are in one relative clause describing the one individual, and who, except for divorce, because of adultery, then in remarriage "commits adultery." It is grammatically impossible for this verse to refer to two different subjects.
Please take note that this verse is not discussing an individual who only divorces without remarrying. The only concern of the verse is with an individual who both divorces and remarries.
In Divorce and Remarriage: Four Christian Views edited by H. Wayne House, Dr. Thomas R. Edgar, professor of New Testament at Capital Bible Seminary in Lanham, Maryland, states that any interpretation claiming that this verse allows divorce only, without allowing for remarriage is more than intellectually dishonest, for it is grammatically impossible.
In spite of the fact that the official Protestant position, since they broke away from the Roman Catholic Church during the Reformation, has always been "Sola Scriptura," - "Scripture Alone" as the only rule of measure to which they adhere, on this one particular subject of the God given right to divorce and remarry; strong prejudice and emotional suppositions appear, in many cases, to have clearly ruled and clouded the minds of some of our most formidable "Church Leaders."
Self professed repentant criminals, in some instances, have found more grace forthcoming from the official body of Jesus Christ than have deserted or woefully mistreated and abused women and children whose husband/father and provider has abandoned them for a new relationship. In spite of Christ's very own words granting His permission, whenever women have attempted:
1) to legally escape such a marriage, with the full sanction of "the church," and/or
2) to receive the church's blessing and participation in a remarriage to a fellow believer, they have been denied.
It is most unfortunate that this clearly appears to have been, for some men, a personal "power and control" issue, not withstanding Christ's own clear instructions to the contrary.
It is very difficult to find words which can adequately describe such an attitude and mode of conduct on the part of those who claim to serve Jesus as Lord and fulfill the role of protective shepherds to His flock. One is aberrant!
The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible, compiled and edited by Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, Th.D. in which his footnote to Matthew 5:31-32 reads as follows: "An exegetical paraphrase of these two very difficult verses would be "And it was said, "Whosoever dismisses his wife, let him give her a bill of divorcement" (see Deuteronomy 24:1-4 where a written divorce was for the protection of the wife, for in middle eastern culture in surrounding countries, a wife could be divorced by saying "I divorce thee" before witnesses, and only men had the right to divorce).
"But I say unto you that whosoever dismisses his wife except for reason of fornication (while she is his wife) makes her to be considered as having adultery committed against her, and whosoever marries one who is unjustifiably dismissed is considered as committing adultery."
Dr. Larry O. Richards, Baptist Theologian and Professor, in his Richards Complete Bible Handbook, which was formerly published as The Word Bible Handbook and in Divorce and Remarriage edited by H. Wayne House, observes that the common assumption which underlies their exegesis, that the Bible teaches marriage is indissoluble, cannot be sustained. Only by tormenting the text, and an implicit retreat from the full inspiration and authority of Scripture, can the "no divorce" and "divorce, but no remarriage" positions be claimed.
God's grace in allowing divorce and remarriage in "valid" situations does not imply that such action is ever God's ideal, for it is instead, at times, the lesser of two evils, and never to be pursued without serious Bible Study and prayer.
In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul's treatment of divorce is eminently practical. The Corinthian believers were desperate to know how to obey Paul's injunction not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers, and Christ's teaching on the marital ideal of permanency.
In progressive verses in 1 Corinthians 7, Believer's are told not to initiate divorce, even from an unsaved spouse, but if they did divorce, they were to remain unmarried while they sought reconciliation. Paul then went on to release those whose unsaved spouses would not return to the marriage from bondage, clearly implicating their freedom to the right to remarry.
This understanding of the text also avoids the spiritual contradiction of affirming grace and forgiveness for one sinner, while insisting that there is neither grace nor forgiveness for another.
Dr. Richard's concludes that "Christians must avoid the temptation to develop a legalism that turns biblical principles into inflexible rules, thus misunderstanding God's will, by drawing conclusions from Scripture without regard to the whole counsel of God, historically, culturally and without consideration of various understandings of passages in the original text. We must guard against a logic that says "A" must follow "B" without stopping to consider God's amazing ability to turn our "logic" into foolishness by infusions of a grace so overwhelming that we fail to comprehend its implications and reality.