1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
There are pastors who believe that Christians must never divorce and remarry if both spouses are still alive, even if one of them is unfaithful. And there are pastors who say that divorce and remarriage is allowed but only on Biblical grounds. What then is permitted or not permitted for Christians? Does God allow them to divorce and remarry? This article discusses the few important verses related to this topic and our conclusions that are based on these verses.
1.2
We wish to reiterate that every article in this website including this article, is written only for Christians. They are encouraged to use our sub-headings for each paragraph, and serial numberings that are provided on the left-hand column for better navigation. They are also encouraged to have their Bibles always open tot he relevant section for quick reference.
2.0
ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY
2.1
Luke 16:18 (NASB95) states:
(18) “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.
2.2
Luke 16:18 Commentary: The reason why remarriage is considered committing adultery is because the original marriage is still valid in the sight of God. It is clear from this verse that any sex outside of the original marriage is considered a sin, and every subsequent act of having sex within any remarriage or subsequent remarriages that is outside of the original marriage, would be considered persistent sinning, so that those sins are piled up, sin upon more sin. The original marriage is still intact, otherwise it would not be considered adultery. Too strict? Not convinced? Let us see other verses.
2.3
Mark 10:10-12 (NASB95) states:
(10) In the house the disciples began questioning Him about this again. (11) And He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; (12) and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.”
2.4
Mark 10:10-12 Commentary: Please note that Jesus called the new spouses in the remarriage, “another woman” and “another man” as He does not recognize them as new wives or new husbands. As long as both spouses of the original marriage are still alive, the marriage is still valid and intact in the sight of God. Any remarriage would be considered committing adultery. But are there exceptions? Please read further.
2.5
Matt 19:3-6 (NASB20) states:
(3) Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” (4) And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, (5) and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? (6) So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no person is to separate.”
2.6
Matt 19:3-5 Commentary: Marriage is between one man and one woman; no other forms of combination is allowed. The phrase, “the two shall become one flesh,” is not referring to having children but referring to unity. A married couple is still physically two bodies, but their oneness and their unitedness are supposed to be so close that they are like extensions of each other. In an ideal situation, the husband, apart from seeing through his own eyes, also sees the world through the eyes of his wife, and vice versa. Both are to be so united, that they are like one person. Hence, they are one flesh in terms of unity.
2.7
Matt 19:6 Commentary: Jesus said that what God has joined together, no person is to separate. Christians should take note and walk carefully. This is because verse 6 is not a statement of explanation, or a prophesy, or a parable with hidden meanings. Verse 6 is a command. Thus if Christians divorce (apart from those situations which will be discussed later, Heb 10:26 will likely apply to them because divorce proceedings usually take a longer time to complete. Depend on the country, sometimes it can take as long as 6 months to finalize. In all that time, it would be almost impossible for the divorcing couple to say that they divorced without thinking, or in a moment of weakness, or in total ignorance. The situation is further worsened if the divorcing couple were warned by a pastor or another Christian, yet they still went ahead to divorce. In our view, this type of sin is willful and deliberate. And it is certain that judgement awaits those who sin willfully. All kinds of reasons are often cited to justify divorce and somehow people around the divorcing couple are expected to be more understanding and more compassionate to their “plight.” But they are not the ones that divorcees should be worried about, It is God who said that He hates divorce (Mal 2:16) and it is God who declared that what He has joined together, no person is to separate. Therefore, it is God that they are offending. But then there are many who have no fear of God. So what is Heb 10:26? Heb 10:26 states that if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice of sins. Therefore, it is obvious that those who are already divorced and remarried before their conversion to Christ, Heb 10:26 will not apply to them as they have yet to receive the knowledge of the truth. Similarly, those who have divorced and have remarried after their conversion to Christ but genuinely did not know that divorce and remarriage is not allowed, Heb 10:26 will also not apply to them because they were still young in the faith and had no knowledge of this truth. But if they were given the knowledge of this truth, especially if there were warned by other Christians beforehand, but still they went ahead to divorce and remarry, then Heb 10:26 will definitely apply to them because they have sinned willfully. And as long as they are unrepentant and continue to remain in their new marriage, they are sinning willfully and sinning repeatedly so that their sins are piled up, sins upon more sins. These so-called Christians are those who have come to a certain level of knowledge of the gospel, but ultimately reject it in favor of their sin. In actuality, they were never saved, but in their delusion, they think they are saved. This is because only His sheep will hear His voice (John 10:27). They were never His sheep, which is why they refuse to hear His voice. Let us also see 1 Cor 7:10-11.
2.8
1 Cor 7:10-11 (NASB95) states:
(10) But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband (11) (But if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
2.9
1 Cor 7:10-11 Commentary: These two verses (v10-11) are referring to Christian couples, the wife is not to leave her husband and even if she does leave, she is to remain unmarried. The fact that she must remain unmarried tells us that she is still married to her original husband and that she has only walked away physically. As for the husband, not only is he not supposed to divorce his wife, but there is not mention of him leaving her physically. the husband is also supposed to cleave to his wife, the burden id not the husband to make every effort to cleave, to adhere and to stick to her. Every effort should be made by the husband to reconcile with his wife who may have physically left him. In Genesis 2:24, the words, “be joined” is the Hebrew word, “dabaq” which means to cling or adhere closely to something or someone like glue.
2.10
Matt 19:7-9 (NASB20) states:
(7) They said to Him, “Why, then, did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?” (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. (9) And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
2.11
Matt 19:7-9 Commentary: Verse 7, when Pharisees asked Jesus about the command Moses gave, they were likely referring to Deu 24:1. In verse 8, Jesus clarified that it was Moses who permitted the Jews to divorce their wives due to the hardness of their hearts, it was not God. From the beginning it was always God’ intention for marriage to be permanent. After that clarification concerning divorce, Jesus immediately clarified Deu 24:1 with verse 9 (Matt 19:9). In verse 9, Jesus said, “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery. This brings up the first exception to His teaching on no divorce for married couples. Thus, the only reason that a man (not a woman) can divorce his wife is his wife’s sexual immorality. What if it is the man who is sexually immoral? Can his wife divorce him for the same reason? The answer is no, not because we are biased against women but because we cannot find it in Scripture that supports that situation. Let us read another verse with an almost similar exception found in Matt 5:31-32.
2.12
Matt 5:31-32 (NASB95) states:
(31) “It was said, ‘Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce’; (32) but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
2.13
Matt 5:31-32 and Matt 19:8-9 Commentary (Part 1): Matt 5:31-32 is similar to Matt 19:8-9. In both pair of verses, divorce is allowed only if the wife is found to be sexually immoral – this is the first allowable reason for divorce and remarriage, and it is applicable only to the husband. In our view, it is unwise to accuse the Lord of being archaic. The Lord is from everlasting to everlasting. If He did not mention about the situation where the husband could also be sexually immoral, it is because He knows exactly what He is doing. Compared to Him, all of us were only born yesterday so let us not be wise in our own eyes. For the sake of analysis, we speculate that the one possible reason could be the possibly of the sexual sin affecting the next generation, that is, the children resulting from sexual sins. Let us analyze and discuss this with the following examples.
Example A – Husband K7 and married to wife K8. But K7 is sexually immoral with women outside of his marriage. While K8 is likely to be very disappointed and emotionally affected by her cheating husband, the children of K7 and K8, under typical circumstances, will not be adversely affected. At most K8 can walk away as allowed under 1 Cor 7:10-11 and K7 will have to account for his behavior to K8 and especially to God. But there is absolutely nothing compelling that requires a divorce. Even if K7 is unrepentant and continues in his lifestyle of sexual immorality, the “one-flesh” unit between K7 and K8 can still be maintained, albeit with a lot of difficultly. If K7 has children with outsiders, K7 will have to deal with the trouble himself. And if K7 and K8 does not have children, then there is even lesser reasons why K7 and K8 should divorce. Let us now look at another example.
Example B – Husband E7 is married to wife E8. But E8 is sexually immoral with men outside of her marriage. E7 is likely to be very disappointed and angry with his cheating wife. If E7 and E8 do not have any children at that point of time, then in our view, E7 should not use Matt 19:9 to divorce his wife, but should forgive E8 just as the Lord as forgiven him. This is especially if E8 repents of her sin. But if E8 is unrepentant, then provisions have to be made to allow E7 to divorce his wife. Which is what the Lord has done. In our opinion, E8’s continued sexual immorality will invariably increase the possibility of her having children with outsiders. If the Lord does not permit E7 to divorce and E8 starts having illegitimate children, then E7 is indirectly being forced by the Lord to bring up her children with outsiders. When those children grow up and those other men start appearing a the family home to claim their children, who does those children belong to? E7 may think that those children are his, but appearance, skin tone or even a DNA test will prove that those children are not. This situation will get even more complicated if E8 takes instructions from her lovers on how those children ought to be brought up, all within the family home. Is E8 supposed to listen to the fathers of her children or to E7? It should be E7, is it not? But those are not E7’s children. Thus pursuing the “one-flesh” unity in such situations is almost impossible for both E7 and E8. How should E7 treat those illegitimate children and vice verse? The questions are many and not as straightforward as Example A.
The main difference between example A and example B is the wife’s potential to have children. In example A, K7’s sexual sins usually stay outside of the family home and even if K7 brings the results of his sexual sins into his home, the “one-flesh” unit with K8 is still possibly to achieve albeit with much difficulty. Whereas in example B, it is very difficult when E8’s children does not belong to E7. And when E8’s children grow up and E8’s lovers claim them, the situation gets even more complicated and untenable. The “one-flesh” unity with E7 as head of his wife is much more difficult to sustain with example B. Nonetheless, it is still not completely impossible if there is true repentance on the part of E8.
2.14
Matt 5:31-32 and Matt 19:8-9 Commentary (Part 2): There can be many more different scenarios when it comes to sexual sins. But even with the most difficult situation, it is not at all compulsory to divorce the wife, the moment the husband discovers her unchastity. The husband should forgive his wife just as the Lord has forgiven him, but of course, only if she repents. If she is unrepentant, then the Lord has provided a way out for the husband, even though He hates divorce (Mal 2:16). As for the husband’s possible sexual immorality and the Lord not allowing the wife to divorce him, the reasons that we have provided above are only speculative. Those reasons provided are not found anywhere in Scripture and thus it may or may not be God’s reason. Thus, once again, we wish to highlight that based on 1 Cor 7:10-11, the wife may physically walk away from her husband, but she is not allowed to divorce him even if he is sexually immoral. Nonetheless, there remains one allowable reason for the wife to divorce her husband. Let us now take a look at the situation between Christian and non-Christian spouses.
2.15
1 Cor 7:39 (NASB95) states:
(39) A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.
2.16
1 Cor 7:39 Commentary: This verse is referring to Christian spouses. The Christian wife is bound to her Christian husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone as long as he is also another Christian. There is no allowable reason for Christian wives to divorce their Christian husbands. But what about Christians who have non-Christian spouses whom they have married before their conversion? Are they supposed to divorce their non-Christian spouses? Let us take a look at 1 Cor 7:12-16.
2.17
1 Cor 7:12-16 (NASB95) states:
(12) But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. (13) And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away. (14) For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. (15) Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace. (16) For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?
2.18
1 Cor 7:12-16 Commentary: These verses tell us that Christians must not divorce their unbelieving spouses if they agree to continue living together. However, if their unbelieving spouses want to leave, then let them leave, the Christian spouse that is being deserted is, “not under bondage” in such cases. Many have understood this phrase, “not under bondage” as being similar to the situation given by Jesus in Matt 5:32 and Matt 19:9 where divorce is allowed under the stated circumstances. While this is true, it should not be seen in the same light. For the sake of discussion, let us call Matt 5:32 and Matt 19:9 as the first allowable reason and 1 Cor 7:15 as the second allowable reason for divorce and remarriage. Both situations are different from each other in that the first allowable reason allows the husband to divorce his immoral wife, that is, the divorce can only be initiated and carried out by the husband. This first allowable reason does not apply to the wife if the husband is immoral. Whereas the second allowable reason is passive and can be applicable to either the husband or the wife, where they let their unbelieving spouses leave if they insist on leaving and they are not to take the initiative to divorce them. In the second allowable reason, if their unbelieving spouses leave them, them those believing spouses are free to remarry again. Their remarriage, however, must be to another believer.
2.19
1 Cor 7:12-16 (Argument No.1): There are some who say that 1 Cor 7:15’s, “let him leave” only allows the believing spouse to separate but not divorce and remarry. They have read the two verses, 1 Cor 7:15 & 16 together so that the unbelieving spouse and the believing spouse are still married even if they are separated because of the hope that the believing spouse might save the unbelieving spouse. They reasoned that if verse 15 really meant divorce, then verse 16 would not be addressing them as wives or husbands. Kindly read 1 Cor 7:15 & 16 together without reading verse 14 in order to understand their point of view.
2.20
1 Cor 7:12-16 (Argument No.1, Our Reply): We disagree with their view. We wish to emphasize again that people should not read one or two verses and then try to interpret them unless it is very clear and unambiguous. They need to read all five verses from verse 12 to 16 to understand the passage better. Verses 12 and 13 are talking about not divorcing unbelieving spouses if they consent to live with their spouses who are believers. Then verse 14 talks about their children being holy because of the believing parent. After that comes verse 15 that says, “Yet if the unbelieving spouse leaves, let him leave; the believing spouse is not under bondage…” Why is the unbelieving spouse leaving? It is because he or she is not willing to live with their believing spouse – verse 15 is referring back to what was said in verses 12 and 13. So if they leave, let them leave, the believing spouse is not under bondage. If verse 15 is merely referring to separation, the the believing spouse is still under bondage to their unbelieving spouse because in separation they are still married. It seems very clear to us that verse 15 is referring to divorce and not just separation. Then how does verse 16 tie into all these verses? Verse 16 is a “wrapping up” statement that explains what was said in verses 12-15. The true believer continues to walk the difficult path of the straight and narrow, their unbelieving spouse can come along if they want to. But if they choose to leave, let them leave. It is they who have chosen to leave. But if they want to come along, please let them come along, for who knows if they get saved along the way? In our opinion, 1 Cor 7:15 is the second allowable reason for divorce and remarriage for both husbands and wives.
2.21
1 Cor 7:12-16 (Argument No.2): Another reason some commentators gave was that the Greek word used for “bondage” (douloo) in 1 Cor 7:15, is not the same word used in verse 39 of the same chapter where Paul says, “A wife is bound (deo) as long as her husband lives.” So since “douloo” and “deo” are not the same word, then 1 Cor 7:15 cannot be the second allowable reason for lawful divorce and remarriage, they reasoned.
2.22
1 Cor 7:12-16 (Argument No. 2, Our Reply): But the word “douloo” means to become enslaved. Where the enslavement has the effect of one person belonging and subjecting to another person, which could also mean spouses subjecting to each other and belonging to each other. So, in the case of 1 Cor 7:15, if the unbelieving spouse leaves, Paul says, “let him leave, as the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases…” The words, “not under bondage” would mean no longer being enslaved or subjected to the other person. But if verse 15 does not mean divorce, then both spouses are still enslaved or still “under bondage” which is not what verse 15 says. Therefore, it is our view that the Christian spouse is freed, if the conditions as specified under verse 15 are met. If freed then remarriage is allowable. Hence it is our opinion that 1 Cor 7:15 is the second allowable reason for divorce and remarriage. Unlike the first allowable reason, the second allowable reason is applicable to both the husband and the wife. As for the question about “douloo” being different from “deo,” actually the word douloo is derived from doulos meaning “slave” or “bondservant” which itself comes from the word, “deo” meaning to bind. So deo is about the act of binding and douloo is about the state or result of being bound, especially in the sense of servitude. So one leads to the other, in a way. Hence, they may be different words but they are related to each other.
2.23
1 Cor 7:12-16 (The Puzzling Words of v.14): Let us get back to verse 14. 1 Cor 7:14 can be confusing to some. If verse 14 is read together with verse 16, it can be seen that Paul is not saying that the salvation of one spouse will save the other unbelieving spouse and their children. For everyone must come to faith in Christ on their own in order to gain eternal salvation. So, what then is Paul saying?
2.24
1 Cor 7:12-16 (The Puzzling Words of v.14, Our Reply): Now we all know that marriage to an unbeliever after turning to Christ is not allowed according to 2 Cor 6:14. But what if the believer is already married to an unbeliever before coming to Christ? 2 Cor 6:14-17 will pose a problem to believers who come to Christ after they are married to unbelievers. What to do with them? Are they to divorce? What if unbelieving spouses want to continue staying married to their believing spouses? Shall the believer still send him or her away? After all, 2 Cor 6:14-17 did say that believers are not to be bound together with unbelievers, not to fellowship with darkness, to be separate and not touch what is unclean. Should the newly converted believer refrain from touching what is unclean? Not necessary! This is because 1 Cor 7:14 tells us that the unbelieving spouse is sanctified (made holy) through the believing spouse. In addition, all of their children are also made holy through the believing parent. Thus, one could say that 1 Cor 7:14 clarifies the problem posed in 2 Cor 6:14-17, with regard to the believing spouse coming to Christ after marriage to an unbeliever. Through the believer, both the unbelieving spouse and children are sanctified (made holy) for the purpose of being a family that is acceptable to God. The whole family (believing spouse, unbelieving spouse and children) are made holy and set apart for this purpose through the believing spouse. Thus there is no need to divorce the unbelieving spouse and no need to treat their children as unclean. God sees them as acceptable because of the believer.
3.0
CONCLUSION
3.1
What constitutes marriage according to Scripture for Christians? A few conditions need to be met before a couple can be considered married in the sight of God. Firstly, according to Matt 19:4-5, it must be between a man and a woman. Any other configuration is not acceptable. Secondly, according to Mal 2:14, there must be an exchange of covenantal vows between the couple – covenantal vows are promises that the couple makes to each other such as the promise to be faithful as long as both of them shall live. And finally, also according to Mal 2:14, though not explicitly stated, God should be the witness when those covenantal vows are exchanged. So, the best place to exchange vows is in the gathering of God’s people because when two or three are gathered together in His name, He is there in their midst (Matt 18:20). Once all of the above conditions are met, the Christian couple is considered married, regardless of whether the couple consummates their marriage physically.
3.2
But what if a couple who are unbelievers got legally married outside of the gathering of God’s people, are they still considered married in the sight of God? Yes, because according to Rom 13:1-2, there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God. If such marriages are not recognized, Paul would not be addressing the issue of one of them coming to Christ after marriage (1 Cor 7:12-13). So, if that is the case, also based on Rom 13:1-2, since God recognizes a legally married couple, does God also recognize a divorce done legally by the authorities? No, because divorce goes against God’s word and His word is the highest authority above all authorities. God has made it clear in Mal 2:16 that He hates divorce. Marriage is permanent as long as both spouses are alive. Anyone who divorces his or her spouse and marries another person commits adultery. Nonetheless, Scripture has provided two allowable reasons for divorce and remarriage. The first allowable reason is applicable only to the husband and that is, if the wife is found to be sexually immoral, the husband in this situation is allowed by Christ to divorce her and remarry another person (Matt 5:32 and Matt 19:9). This is especially if she is unrepentant. But if she repents, we are of the view that the husband should forgive her as Christ has forgiven him. The Greek word for sexual immorality in Matt 19:9 (NKJV) is “Porneia” which means any sexual activity outside marriage. The second allowable reason is applicable to both the husband and the wife, where the unbelieving spouse insists on divorcing the believing spouse. The affected spouse who is a believer is allowed to divorce the unbelieving spouse and remarry another believer (1 Cor 7:15) – please read our explanation found in the article above on the meaning of, “not under bondage” in 1 Cor 7:15 (see s/n 2.22).
3.3
In all honesty, the writer of this article did hope that Scripture could provide more allowable reasons for divorce and remarriage, seeing that human relationships can potentially be very complicated and very difficult. Those affected often seek to find a way out of their marriage, while concurrently hoping to stay within His commandments. But unfortunately, or fortunately depending on the person, there are only two allowable reasons. Marriage is permanent and we cannot interpret Scripture anyway we like – it is permanent because Scripture said so. What God has joined together, you had better not let fall apart (Matt 19:6). Therefore, any divorce and remarriage apart from the two aforesaid allowable reasons is adultery, Continuing to stay in that marriage (that is not even considered a marriage by God) and not return back to the original marriage, demonstrates unrepentance and rebellion against His commands. Every time the couple within that adulterous remarriage engage in sexual activity, it will be considered willful sinning upon more willful sinning being piled up higher and higher. Heb 10:26 will most certainly apply to these so-called Christians. In view of all these problems that could possibly occur in a person’s marriage, we highly recommend that the true believer in Christ pray earnestly for God’s guidance long before any dating occurs. If that believer has the ability to remain single, then singleness is the better option according to apostle Paul (1 Cor 7:32-35). Finally, please see the following case study.
3.4
Case Study: We have read about this case but cannot independently verify if the story is true. Nonetheless we have decided to put it into this article to show that there can be many different situations, scenarios, many twists and turns when it comes to sexual sins.
Reverend T01 was a senior pastor of an independent non-denominational church. As senior pastor, he had to keep up with appearances in front of his congregation, so he tried for many years to get his wife T02 to divorce him instead of initiating the divorce himself. T01 even tried mind control techniques on T02, but she stubbornly refused to divorce T01. Later, it was found that T01 was having an affair with his adopted daughter T03. But instead of repenting, T01 forsook all pretenses and openly tried to divorce T02 in order to marry T03. T02 instead of getting other leaders within her own church to help, had to get elders from other churches to help settle the matter. Through those elders’ intervention, T03 repented and refused to marry her father. T01 on the other hand refused to admit he is wrong. But T02 finally divorced T01. We have no further information on what became of that congregation or whether he still remained as senior pastor. A sad ending to the story.
The most likely reason why T02 did not want to approach the other leaders within her own church for help is because she was not confident that they would not be unbiased toward T01. What T01 did was clearly wrong. Moreover, T01 refused to repent of his sins even after the elders’ counsel (albeit the elders came from another church). T01 instead of teaching God’s word to the congregation became an example of how unchristian a so-called Christian can be. It is clear to us and very likely even to unbelievers that T01 is completely unfit to be pastor. In our opinion, Matt 18:15-17 applies to T01, that is, that T01 should be treated as a non-Christian. And because T01 is considered a non-Christian and that he wants to leave T02, the second allowable reason should apply to T02. Not only is T02 passive in this case, but she also tried to avoid leaving T01. In our view, all the conditions are met for the second allowable reason to be applied to T02’s case and that is, that T02 can safely divorce and remarry in the Lord without sinning against God.