There's no greater destroyer of the fabric of
our society than divorce. In a divorce settlement,
there are no winners. The couple being divorced
certainly could not be classified as winners,
nor could their broader family, their parents,
brothers and sisters, or relationships that have
perhaps grown dear have been shattered. Neighbors
could not be called winners because they are
caught often in the crux of it all and have to
make a decision regarding their friendship. Nor
is society at large a winner in any divorce.
But perhaps the most hurt in divorces are the
children, who are often forced by circumstances
to choose between parents. Children often feel
responsible themselves for the divorce of their
parents. Albert Solnit, director of the Yale
Child Study Center, said, Divorce is one of the
most serious and complex mental health crises
facing children of the 80s. That is a tragic
statement to me. About one half... of children
born this year will be in one -parent homes by
18 years of age, one -half of them. The number
of single -parent homes is growing at 20 times
the rate of two -parent homes, largely because
of divorce. What is our response? Do we throw
up our hands in disgust? Do we shun those who
have been through the heartache and tragedy of
divorce? What does the Bible say should be our
attitude toward divorce and remarriage, as well
as those who have been through the trauma? It
seems that logically there are four positions
that could be taken regarding divorce and remarriage.
One, that there is no divorce and no remarriage
under any circumstances. Two, that divorce is
allowed under some circumstances, but remarriage
is never permitted. Three, that divorce and remarriage
are permitted in very limited circumstances.
And four, that divorce and remarriage are both
permitted in all circumstances. Which position
is consistent with God's Word? To be sure, there
is considerable confusion regarding this matter
of divorce and remarriage. But the problem is
not that the Bible is confused about it. Why
then the confusion? Well, because we perhaps
are not as careful in our study of God's Word
as we ought to be. The confusion does not come
because God's Word is not clear about the subject,
but rather because of poor exegesis. of God's
Word and because we interpret God's Word from
a personal bias that we may have. The thing that
we need to do, whether it's regarding this subject
or any doctrine, is to see what the data of God's
Word says and then make our decision and take
our position. There are good people who take
differing positions on this matter of divorce
and remarriage. I have read a number of different
positions, even in preparing for this message
tonight. Ultimately, each one of us must decide
for himself, that is, to allow the Holy Spirit
to bring him to an understanding of what the
Word says, and then to give us a humility and
a forbearance, to allow another believer to perhaps
see it differently. We should never make the
mistake of making this teaching on divorce and
remarriage, whichever position one takes, a test
of fellowship. It should never become the division
among brethren. When my brother and I disagree
on... this teaching or on any teaching, then
it is likely that one or maybe both of us are
wrong. Now, what does the Bible teach regarding
this matter of divorce and remarriage? Well,
let's look at what the Bible has to say about
that. In order to do this, we're going to need
to go quickly through a number of passages so
you get your fingers oiled up out there and get
your minds in gear as we move through, first,
the teaching of the Old Testament. To begin,
I'd like for us to go to Genesis chapter 2, verse
24. In this familiar passage, we have God's ideal
stated to us. This is before the sin of man.
It is when man was still without sin, living
in the Garden of Eden. And in verse 24 it says,
For this cause a man shall leave his father and
his mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and
they shall become one flesh. So there is a leaving,
there is a cleaving, and there is a becoming.
Leaving father and mother, cleaving to one another,
and becoming one flesh, establishing a new home,
a new unit, a new oneness. What we have here
is God's ideal, and that is a permanent, monogamous
marriage relationship. That cannot be improved
upon. It cannot be. That is God's ideal, and
we must forever keep that before us. At the same
time, there is something else we need to keep
in mind, and that is that sin has affected God's
perfect creation, the ideal. Just as sin has
affected every other part of creation, so it
also has affected marriage. For example, death
ends the marital relationship, and that is not
God's ideal. God's ideal was that the marriage
should be forever, that there would be no death.
But sin changed that. Sin impacted marriage,
and now marriage ends with death. Likewise, divorce
did occur in the ancient days, even among God's
Old Testament people, the Jews, as we shall see.
So we have here the statement of God's ideal,
and yet we recognize that sin entered the picture
in chapter 3 of Genesis and tragically affected
all of God's perfect creation. What then is God's
attitude toward divorce? There is not a clearer
statement of it than in the other end of the
Old Testament in the book of Malachi. Would you
turn there with me, please? Malachi. chapter
2. In this part of the book, the prophet is indicting
the nation because of its iniquities. And one
of the sins that was rampant in that day for
which they were judged by God was the sin of
divorce. He mentions this in verses 13 through
16 of chapter 2. The Jews had divorced their
Jewish wives, the wives of their youth, and had
married pagans. In response to that, in verse
16, just to summarize it, I hate divorce, says
the Lord, the God of Israel, and him who covers
his garment with wrong. The picture there is
a garment that is splattered with blood or with
mud. And he says, I hate divorce. I hate him
who covers his garment with wrong, who is splattered
with iniquity. So take heed to your spirit that
you do not deal treacherously, says the Lord.
We have here a confirmation, as clear as it can
be, that God hates divorce. Divorce is a sin,
and it is a sin which God hates. There are some
who say, how then can we have anything to do
with divorce or people who become divorced? God
hates divorce, they say, and it's clear that
he does. But may I remind you that at least in
Proverbs 6, verses 16 through 19, there's another
list of sins which God also says he hates. Those
who lie. those who cause dissension among the
brethren, those who have a proud look. God hates
those sins as much as he hates divorce. Which
sin is it that God loves? None. God hates all
sin in his holiness. We must remember that marriage
vows are to be taken very seriously, and we see
here, in fact, in verse 14. the importance of
the covenant of marriage, the vows that are made
there. Hosea, the Old Testament prophet, is an
example to us of how important the vows of marriage
are. Hosea faithfully loved Gomer, his adulterous
wife. That love that he had for her is an illustration.
to us of how serious marriage vows are in the
sight of God. For even in the most difficult
of circumstances, her gross adultery, Hosea did
not divorce her, as far as the book seems to
indicate, but on the contrary, he patiently dealt
with Gomer until she was restored. The point
that is made here, as it can be applied to marriage,
is that love seeks to forgive and to restore
a mate who has sinned. What happens in Hosea's
case is an illustration of God's unchanging love
for his Old Testament people, Israel. Israel
was also his spiritually adulterous wife. And
yet, having said that, we must recognize the
fact that divorce existed even among the Israelites.
It did exist among them. And so God regulated
divorce among His people. Notice that I use the
term, He regulated it. He did not command it.
He did not even indicate He preferred it. But
He did regulate that which existed. He limited
its exercise to adultery. That is, he permitted
it only in that circumstance. And yet even then,
forgiveness and restoration were preferable.
Notice with me some of the regulations of the
law concerning divorce among God's Old Testament
people. Turn to the book of Deuteronomy, chapter
22. We'll come to the end of a paragraph here
just to see the punishment involved. And the
situation is that a husband might claim after
his marriage that his wife was not chaste when
he married her. If, in fact, he has proven to
be untruthful in that accusation, this is his
punishment. Deuteronomy 22, 18. The elders of
that city shall take the man. and chastise him,
that is, beat him. And they shall find him a
hundred shekels of silver and give it to the
girl's father, because he publicly defamed a
virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife.
He cannot divorce her all his days. It doesn't
say how compatible they might have been after
that accusation and the trial and the punishment.
But the fact is that there was to be no divorce.
That is the regulation regarding it. Drop down
a few verses to verse 28. If a man finds a girl
who is a virgin who is not engaged and seizes
her and lies with her and they are discovered,
then the man who lay with her shall give to the
girl's father 50 shekels of silver and she shall
become his wife because he has violated her.
He cannot divorce her all his days. And so we
see that rape obligated a marriage and prohibited
forever the possibility of a divorce in that
relationship. Those are two of the regulations.
Now, why am I talking about that? Because there's
an implication here. And the implication is that
in some instances, divorce might have been allowed
for. But in the case that is described here,
there is forever no divorce possible in those
relationships. Turn back to Leviticus chapter
21, where we have a law regarding the priests
of Israel. We'll read only verse 7, although
verse 14 is regarding the high priest and says
essentially the same thing. Leviticus 21, 7.
They shall not take a woman who is profaned by
harlotry, nor shall they take a woman divorced
from her husband, for he is holy to his God.
Now what is it saying here? It's saying that
in his marriage a priest could not marry A woman
who was profaned by harlotry, nor could he marry
a woman divorced from her husband. Priests were
not permitted to marry divorced women. What this
tells us is that there's an acknowledgement of
the presence in the nation of divorced women.
And it suggests, at least, that these women might
be married to others than priests. but not to
priests. Go back with me now to Deuteronomy chapter
24, and let's look at a more lengthy passage,
verses 1 through 4. We are seeing here what the
Old Testament taught regarding divorce and remarriage.
When a man takes a wife and marries her, Deuteronomy
24 .1, And it happens that she finds no favor
in his eyes because he has found some indecency
in her. Now underline that word indecency. We'll
come back to it. And he writes her a certificate
of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends
her out from his house. And she leaves his house
and goes and becomes another man's wife. And
if the latter husband turns against her and writes
her a certificate of divorce, and puts it in
her hand and sends her out of his house, or if
the latter husband dies, who took her to be his
wife, then her former husband, who sent her away,
is not allowed to take her again to be his wife,
since she has been defiled. That's another word
that you may want to note. We'll come back to
it. For that is an abomination before the Lord,
and you shall not bring sin on the land which
the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance.
Actually, what is stated here is a law regarding
remarriage in Israel. It's not so much dealing
with divorce, but divorce is a part of the context.
It acknowledges the existence of divorce on the
basis of what is called indecency. The only other
time that that word is found in the Old Testament
is in the previous chapter in verses 13 and 14,
and frankly in the text it's not altogether pleasant.
He says, You shall have a spade among your tools,
and it shall be that when you sit down outside,
you shall dig with it and shall turn to cover
up your excrement. Since the Lord your God walks
in the midst of your camp to deliver you and
to defeat your enemies before you, therefore
your camp must be holy. and he must not see anything
indecent among you, lest he turn away from you.
Now, the word indecent is variously understood.
There are those who say that it means indecent
exposure, and that certainly is a meaning of
the word. Alfred Edersheim, in his writing regarding
Jewish culture, says that the word refers to,
quote, every kind of impropriety. such as going
about with loose hair, spinning in the street,
familiarly talking with men, ill -treating her
husband's parents in his presence, brawling,
that is, speaking to her husband so loudly that
the neighbors could hear, a general bad reputation,
close quote. And so the word has a broad variety
of meanings, but in the context before us in
Deuteronomy 24, it seems to mean Some kind of
indecent activity that stops just short of adultery,
for which, of course, execution by stoning was
commanded by God. So this is some kind of an
indecency that comes just short of adultery.
It seems to be shameful, sinful indulgence of
a sexual nature. Now please notice that this
text does not authorize divorce. It only relates
to it in a specific kind of case. Now in verse
4 it uses the word defiled and it says that that
woman cannot return to her husband, her first
husband, because she's been defiled. What that
may mean is that her second marriage constituted
adultery. Because there were no grounds of adultery
for the divorce from the first marriage. Therefore,
the divorce from him, the basis of indecency,
something short of adultery, and then her remarriage
to another man became a sin of adultery to her.
Therefore, she was defiled and was not allowed
to return to her first husband. So what this
text may well indicate is how improper divorces
produce adultery, if in case, in fact, rather,
that is what defile means in verse 4, adultery.
In Ezra chapter 10, we have an interesting and
a unique occasion in the history of Israel. We
will not take time to read it, but you will recall
that Ezra records what happened in his ministry
after the people returned. from their bondage
in Babylon. The people had sinned greatly against
the Lord by taking to themselves wives of the
pagans who had come in to live in their land
in their absence. And so in Ezra chapter 10,
verses 3 through 5, then again in verse 11, rather,
there is a command of God to the nation to divorce...
those foreign wives to put them away. What seems
to be involved here is a lesser of two evils.
The allowing of mixed marriages would have defiled
the nation with idolatry that came with those
pagan wives. And therefore, on this occasion,
and I remind you it is a unique one, God commanded
that those foreign wives were to be divorced
and put away. I would like you to turn now to
Isaiah chapter 50 and verse 1. For now we're
going to leave the concept of divorce among the
people of Israel, as it existed in the Old Testament,
and see divorce in relation to God. and His people
Israel. In chapter 50, verse 1, it says, Thus
says the Lord, Where is the certificate of divorce
by which I have sent your mother away? Actually,
this is a rhetorical question, for that certificate
did not at that point exist. But what God is
trying to do here is to warn His people. of what
is before them if they persist in their spiritual
adultery, in the worship of idols and pagan gods.
I repeat, there was no certificate of divorce
at this point. This is only a rhetorical question.
But it was a warning to the nation of what might
happen. Turn a few pages over now to the book
of Jeremiah, written some time later. And notice
what did happen. Jeremiah chapter 3. We have
here the word of the Lord through the prophet
Jeremiah. Verse 6. Then the Lord said to me in
the days of Josiah the king, Have you seen what
faithless Israel did? She went up on every high
hill and under every green tree, and she was
a harlot there. In other words, those were the
places where the idols were. And God says that
the nation of Israel committed spiritual harlotry
in worshiping those gods. And I thought, says
God, after she has done all these things, she
will return to me. But she did not return, and
her treacherous sister Judah saw it. 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.
So God says through the prophet Jeremiah that
in fact he divorced himself from spiritually
adulterous Israel, the northern kingdom. And
he says, surely that would have been a warning
to the southern kingdom of Judah to stop her
sin. And yet it was not. It was not. Now, what
do we see as a summary of the Old Testament teaching
regarding divorce and remarriage? Nowhere in
the Old Testament is a written bill of divorcement
authorized by God. And yet, that does not necessarily
mean that God did not allow it. If you will remember,
there were other standards or regulations that
were given by God to man which are not recorded.
in scripture an example of that would be the
proper sacrifices to offer in those days before
the flood cain and abel were aware of which sacrifices
they were to have offered god gave them that
word but it is nowhere recorded for us in scripture
it was given orally and therefore just because
we do not have it recorded in the word of god
does not mean that god did not allow a bill of
divorcement But we also notice that only on the
basis of adultery was divorce ever provided for
by God. And he himself set an example in that.
And only then did he allow it because of his
graciousness for the sinfulness and the hardness
of man. Actually, in the case of adultery, there
should have been what? Execution. The adulterous
person should have been stoned to death, but
God in his grace allowed for a provision of divorce
rather than that. We do not know when that was
begun, but we do have two examples of its practice
to point to. One of them is God himself. For
the nation of Israel was married to him, yet
he... and committed adultery, yet he did not
utterly destroy the nation, but divorced the
nation. Jeremiah 3 .8. A second example is the
instance of Joseph and Mary. Joseph was going
to divorce Mary because he thought initially
that there had been sin involved in her pregnancy.
If the Old Testament law had been strictly followed,
and she had been guilty, she would have had to
have been stoned to death, according to Deuteronomy
22, verses 23 and 24. For you see, an engaged
person, one who is betrothed in the oriental
sense, in that state before they were actually
joined, in the consummation of their marriage,
the betrothal period. That period was just as
significant as the marriage itself, and one who
sinned in a sexual way during that betrothal
period was to be stoned to death as much as one
who was found to be guilty of adultery after
marriage. So really, Mary, if she had been guilty
of sin, should have been stoned to death. But
we see that Joseph, rather, was going to divorce
her and to put her away privately. And so apparently
that was something that was allowed for among
God's people. Now let's go to the New Testament.
Look at the New Testament. In the Gospels, there
are four references to divorce. The first two
are found in the book of Matthew. Please turn
to Matthew chapter 5. Perhaps a word of background
would be wise at this point. Among the Jews in
Jesus' day, there were two schools of thought
regarding divorce and remarriage. There was the
school of Hillel, one of the Jewish teachers,
rabbis. The Hillel School took a liberal approach
to this whole matter and said that divorce could
be allowed for just about any reason. The burning
of a meal, improper seasoning of food, or if
a husband disliked his mother -in -law, he could
divorce his wife. He just had to be sure to get
the bill of divorcement. He had to get the paperwork
done, but if he got the paperwork done, almost
any reason would pass. In contrast to that, there
was the school of Shammai, another Jewish rabbi.
This school was much more conservative than the
other and allowed for divorce only by reason
of lewdness, adultery, or immodesty. The Pharisees
were divided between these two schools, although
the more liberal approach was the more popular
one. They attempted to get Jesus caught in their
argument, as they did on several occasions. In
Matthew 5, verse 31, we have this word. And it
was said, Whoever divorces his wife, let him
give her a certificate of dismissal. That is
Jesus quoting Deuteronomy 24, which we looked
at. But I say to you, that everyone who divorces
his wife except for the cause of unchastity makes
her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced
woman commits adultery. Now we have another similar
word in Matthew 19. Please turn over there. And
here we see the Pharisees doing just what I said
a few moments ago. Some of the Pharisees came,
verse 3, to Jesus, testing him and saying, Is
it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any
cause at all, for any reason? Like the Hillel
school says. And he answered and said, Have you
not read that he who created them from the beginning
made them male and female and said, For this
cause a man shall leave his father and mother
and shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall
become one flesh. In other words, Jesus doesn't
really answer the question. He points them back
to God's ideal. Consequently, they are no longer
two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined
together, let no man separate. They said to him,
Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate
and divorce her? Notice, why did Moses command?
They ask. And again, refer to Deuteronomy 24.
But Jesus responds appropriately. Because of
your hardness of heart, Moses permitted, not
commanded. Moses permitted you to divorce your
wives, but from the beginning it has not been
this way. And I say to you, whoever divorces
his wife except for immorality and marries another
woman commits adultery. And so we have a statement
of our Lord regarding this matter of divorce
and remarriage. And the question that is usually
asked is, what does it mean, immorality, here
in Matthew 19, or in Matthew chapter 5, what
does it mean by unchastity? In both cases, the
word in the Greek is pornea. That is the key
word. What does that mean? Well, there are those
who say that that is the word fornication and
that the word only means sexual activity between
those who are unmarried during the betrothal
period, the engagement period, that that is the
technical and the only meaning of that term.
And yet that is an error. The term has a broader
meaning than that. A study of this word in the
New Testament reveals the fact that this word
pornea actually refers not only to that premarital
sexual activity, but it also applies to any kind
of sexual immorality or unlawful sexual relationship.
The word encompasses another Greek word, moikeia,
which is adultery. So it is not only referring
to sexual activity between unmarried people,
but it embraces as well adultery and various
perversions. One example of that would be 1 Corinthians
10, verse 8, where the word is used regarding...
God's Old Testament people and their sin. In
1 Corinthians 10, 8, it says, Nor let us act
immorally. There's the word. As some of them
did, and 23 ,000 fell in one day. And if you
go back to Numbers chapter 25, where all of this
took place that this is referring to, it's rather
unreasonable to think that only unmarried people
were involved in that sinful activity, that immoral
activity that took place. This word, this key
word in Matthew 5 and 19, if it is made to read
strictly only premarital sexual activity, is
to take the word in an arbitrary way and to limit
its usage. The word does embrace various kinds
of sexual impurity. Now another word regarding
the context of Matthew 5 and 19. The word divorce
that is used here, this verb, is one that cannot
legitimately be defined as referring only to
those who are engaged or betrothed. This word
that is translated divorced in our English includes
those who are married. And as a matter of fact,
clearly in Matthew chapter 19, that is the context.
For they are asking a question on the basis of
Deuteronomy 24, which deals with married people.
Consequently, we see marriage, married people
are involved here, not just those who have been
engaged. There's another point too, and that
is... the indissolubility of Jewish marriage,
that did not begin with its consummation, but
it began with the betrothal, the engagement.
Once the contract was agreed to, often by the
fathers, that contract could not be broken. It
was not dissolvable. And so the punishment, For
sexual impurity, as I have stated before, during
that betrothal period, would be death, the same
as after the consummation physically of the marriage.
Now Jesus also talks about this subject in Mark
10 and Luke 16. In neither of those texts is
there a mention of an exception clause. And of
course the question arises, why? If Jesus mentions
the exception of adultery here and says that
on the basis of adultery, divorce is permissible,
though not preferable, though not commanded,
it is permissible, then why does he not say that
in Mark 10 and Luke 16 as well? And the answer,
the best answer that I know to that, because
I don't know Jesus' mind perfectly as he was
speaking on those occasions, is that as the writers
were writing their Gospels, Mark and Luke, that
statement did not necessarily fit in with their
purpose in writing, and therefore they did not
include it. As we look at the fullness of what
Jesus taught regarding divorce and remarriage,
what is our conclusion? What is our summary?
It is, it seems to me, That Jesus' teaching was
perfectly consistent with what the Old Testament
taught. That God's ideal from the beginning has
been permanent, monogamous, heterosexual marriage.
That God hates divorce. And yet God graciously
provides for the dissolution of marriage in the
case of adultery. Never commanded, not even preferred.
but it is permitted. On the other hand, Jesus
warns that divorce on other grounds is a sin
and that remarriage only compounds that sin of
adultery. That too is very clear. Now as we move
further into the New Testament, there is another
passage in Romans chapter 4, which we have discussed
before when we studied Romans. In that context,
marriage and the death of a spouse are intended
to illustrate the principle of the Christian's
death to the law and his new union with Jesus
Christ. What the apostle says there regarding
marriage and remarriage is not intended by the
apostle to be an instruction regarding divorce.
It is a general statement made to make a point,
to give an illustration of a spiritual truth.
What he says is a good statement and a true statement
and a right statement, but it is not intended
to be his statement on divorce and remarriage.
But as we go to 1 Corinthians chapter 7, we do
have a statement of Paul regarding this matter
of divorce and remarriage. Now, the apostle does
not restate what Jesus has already said. The
Bible is a progressive revelation, so we add
up what is said throughout its pages to come
to a full understanding regarding any doctrine,
including this one. Paul does not restate what
Jesus said, but he goes beyond what our Lord
said. In verses 10 and 11, he deals with married
believers. And he says regarding them that there
is no divorce remarriage option for them. With
the understanding being from the earlier context
that the exception of adultery Fornication is
a basis for it. A basis, I say, for permission,
but not a basis for a demand for divorce. God's
preference is forgiveness and restoration. But
beyond that one exception, the apostle makes
it clear that there is no option for believers
regarding divorce. He says, but to the married
I give instructions, not I but the Lord. In other
words, he says the Lord gave this word that the
wife should not leave, and that is a technical
word for divorce, her husband. But if she does
leave, let her remain unmarried or else be reconciled
to her husband, and that the husband should not
send away, another technical word, his wife.
And so it's very clear regarding two believers
who are married. Apart from adultery, which has
already been talked about, there is absolutely
no place for divorce and remarriage. If they
cannot get along together, they may live separately,
but they must remain then separate for the rest
of their lives or else be reconciled to one another.
Verses 12 to 14 begins to deal then with mixed
marriages, and Jesus did not have a word regarding
this. And so the apostle says, this is coming
from me, but we recognize that he spoke by the
inspiration of the Holy Spirit. And what he says
is as fully authoritative as what Jesus said.
In verses 12 to 14, he says regarding mixed marriages,
basically this, stay together if both parties
are willing. Don't separate just because you
become saved after you're married and your husband
does not become a believer or vice versa. That
is not a basis for separating. He says, if there
is a willingness on the part of your unsaved
partner to be with you, stay married. For you
as a saved person bring blessing into that home.
In verse 15, though, he deals with what happens
when the unbelieving departs. He says, if the
unbelieving one leaves, let him leave. In other
words, if there is an unsaved spouse, who says,
I no longer want you. I renounce you as my wife.
I don't want to be any part of you because of
your faith. And he deserts that home. Paul says,
let him go. Let him go. And the word leave here
is that same word that we've been looking at
for divorce. Let him divorce. The brother or
sister is not under bondage in such cases. God
has called us to peace. says the Lord here through
the Apostle Paul. Now the question is, does that
person then have a right for remarriage? And
I believe the answer to that is yes. When he
says the brother or sister is not under bondage,
he uses the word bondage there that is exactly
the same term for the bond of marriage back in
Romans chapter 7. So what the Apostle is saying
here in essence is this. That when there is a
desertion of an unsaved person toward a saved
person in a marriage, that that saved person
is free from obligation to that unsaved person,
no longer under bondage to him or her.