View 2: Divorce Only in Case of Breaking the Betrothal, Incest, Etc.
John Piper is a well-known proponent of this view. Here is a helpful document by Piper presenting 11 points and detailed justification for why the Bible only allows for divorce in case of breaking a betrothal. I would encourage you to work through it; it is very thought-provoking, especially point 11.
1.) Luke 16:18 calls all remarriage after divorce adultery.
2.) Mark 10:11-12 call all remarriage after divorce adultery whether it is the woman or the man who divorces.
3.) Mark 10:2-9 and Matthew 19:3-8 teaches that Jesus rejected the Pharisees’ interpretation of divorce from Deuteronomy 24:1 and reasserted God’s original plan in creation that no human being separate what God has joined together.
4.) Matthew 5:32 does not teach that remarriage is lawful in some cases. Rather it reaffirms that marriage after divorce is adultery, even for those who have been divorced innocently, and that a man who divorces his wife is guilty of the adultery of her second marriage unless she had already become an adulteress before the divorce.
5.) 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 teaches that divorce is wrong but that if it is inevitable the person who divorces should not remarry.
6.) 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Romans 7:1-3 teach that remarriage is legitimate only after the death of a spouse.
7.) Matthew 19:10-12 teaches that special Christian grace is given by God to Christ's disciples to sustain them in singleness when they renounce remarriage according to the law of Christ.
8.) Deuteronomy 24:1-4 does not legislate grounds for divorce but teaches that the "one-flesh" relationship established by marriage is not obliterated by divorce or even by remarriage.
9.) 1 Corinthians 7:15 does not mean that when a Christian is deserted by an unbelieving spouse he or she is free to remarry. It means that the Christian is not bound to fight in order to preserve togetherness. Separation is permissible if the unbelieving partner insists on it.
10.) 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 does not teach the right of divorced persons to remarry. It teaches that betrothed virgins should seriously consider the life of singleness, but do not sin if they marry.
11.) The exception clause of Matthew 19:9 need not imply that divorce on account of adultery frees a person to be remarried. All the weight of the New Testament evidence given in the preceding ten points is against this view, and there are several ways to make good sense out of this verse so that it does not conflict with the broad teaching of the New Testament that remarriage after divorce is prohibited.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Monday, June 8, 2009
Working through Divorce, Part 3: Understanding Different Views
View 1: The “Divorce and Remarriage for Adultery or Sexual Immorality” View
This is the most widely held view among evangelicals. They argue that porneia generally refers to sexual immorality (cf. Mark 7:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 5:3; Col 3:5). Marriage and the consequential breaking of the marriage covenant, not simply breaking a betrothal, is assumed by Christ. His view is different from the more conservative Shammai school of thought because, in going back to God’s original design in Genesis 1 and 2, he stresses that marriage is to remain permanent. Furthermore, contrary to what is said in Deuteronomy, divorce is not only to be initiated by men, but Jesus’ words imply that both men and women cannot initiate divorce under the sin of sexual immorality.
This is the most widely held view among evangelicals. They argue that porneia generally refers to sexual immorality (cf. Mark 7:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 5:3; Col 3:5). Marriage and the consequential breaking of the marriage covenant, not simply breaking a betrothal, is assumed by Christ. His view is different from the more conservative Shammai school of thought because, in going back to God’s original design in Genesis 1 and 2, he stresses that marriage is to remain permanent. Furthermore, contrary to what is said in Deuteronomy, divorce is not only to be initiated by men, but Jesus’ words imply that both men and women cannot initiate divorce under the sin of sexual immorality.
Working Through Divorce, Part 2
The infamous exception clause. Things would be much easier without it.
Jesus says in Matthew 19:9, “And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery” (ESV).
Jesus does not rule out divorce for any reason. Nobody argues with that. The question is not whether divorce is ever valid, but when and under what conditions it is valid. The debate largely centers on the exception in the above verse—“except for sexual immorality.”
Whether this is for true marriages or betrothals, here is an important observation: Jesus does NOT demand divorce; it is merely permitted. Contemporary Judaism required divorce in the case of sexual immorality; Jesus merely permits it. Thus, Jesus’ view of divorce was higher than even the conservative branch of Judaism in his day.
Jesus says in Matthew 19:9, “And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery” (ESV).
Jesus does not rule out divorce for any reason. Nobody argues with that. The question is not whether divorce is ever valid, but when and under what conditions it is valid. The debate largely centers on the exception in the above verse—“except for sexual immorality.”
Whether this is for true marriages or betrothals, here is an important observation: Jesus does NOT demand divorce; it is merely permitted. Contemporary Judaism required divorce in the case of sexual immorality; Jesus merely permits it. Thus, Jesus’ view of divorce was higher than even the conservative branch of Judaism in his day.
Working through Divorce, Part 1
A foundational verse on divorce and remarriage in the Old Testament is Deuteronomy 24:1-4, which reads as follows:
When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and if she goes and becomes another man’s wife, and the latter man hates 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 man dies, who took her to be his wife, then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled, for that is an abomination before the LORD. And you shall not bring sin upon the land that the LORD your God is giving you for an inheritance (ESV).
Notice a few things about this text:
a.) It presupposes that divorce is a reality and does not explicitly fight against it “He writes her a certificate of divorce”
b.) It conditions the reason for a divorce based upon the phrase “if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her” In other words, divorce for no reason is not justified in this text. The question now becomes how to properly understand “indecency.”
This passage became the nexus where all debates in Jesus’ time centered. Interpretations of “indecency” abounded. The two school of Pharisees, Shammai and Hillel, interpreted “indecency” as sexual immorality or simply not pleasing one’s husband, respectively. These debates are in view when Jesus is asked in Matthew 19 by the question, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?”
Instead of replying directly to their question, Jesus ups the ante. He replies that divorce was only presupposed by Moses because of their hardness of heart, but it was not so from the beginning. God’s ideal for marriage is permanence. Therefore, as Andreas Kostenberger so effectively notes, Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is “descriptive rather than prescriptive” (God, Marriage, and Family, 228).
So, Jesus says that understanding what “indecency” means is the wrong question, for it misses the purpose of Moses’ instructions and it bats a blind eye at God’s ideal of permanence for marriage.
“So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate” (Matthew 19:6, ESV).
When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and if she goes and becomes another man’s wife, and the latter man hates 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 man dies, who took her to be his wife, then her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after she has been defiled, for that is an abomination before the LORD. And you shall not bring sin upon the land that the LORD your God is giving you for an inheritance (ESV).
Notice a few things about this text:
a.) It presupposes that divorce is a reality and does not explicitly fight against it “He writes her a certificate of divorce”
b.) It conditions the reason for a divorce based upon the phrase “if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her” In other words, divorce for no reason is not justified in this text. The question now becomes how to properly understand “indecency.”
This passage became the nexus where all debates in Jesus’ time centered. Interpretations of “indecency” abounded. The two school of Pharisees, Shammai and Hillel, interpreted “indecency” as sexual immorality or simply not pleasing one’s husband, respectively. These debates are in view when Jesus is asked in Matthew 19 by the question, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?”
Instead of replying directly to their question, Jesus ups the ante. He replies that divorce was only presupposed by Moses because of their hardness of heart, but it was not so from the beginning. God’s ideal for marriage is permanence. Therefore, as Andreas Kostenberger so effectively notes, Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is “descriptive rather than prescriptive” (God, Marriage, and Family, 228).
So, Jesus says that understanding what “indecency” means is the wrong question, for it misses the purpose of Moses’ instructions and it bats a blind eye at God’s ideal of permanence for marriage.
“So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate” (Matthew 19:6, ESV).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)