"Paul taught that a marriage was a 'relationship' in Christ, not a life sentence to the immoral choices of a spouse."
Editor's note:This article is an excerpt taken from an online book called, Divorce and the Christian, whose website is linked below. We have included only a portion of it, due to its length, and it has been edited for grammar and spelling purposes only. We are of the belief that it can and should be read in its entirety. Having said that, what is presented here on our site is for the purpose of provoking study, thought, and discussion in order to bring understanding to an issue, whose possible erroneous teachings have been tearing up families and driving people away from church in shame for ages. This article is a study that breaks down the words spoken by Christ and Paul and points to potential defects in years of teaching in the church that, if corrected, can promote peace and healing.
Please take the time to read, respond, and discuss. Pray. Study. Click on the link and read the study for yourself. See our questions below and use our comment section to give thoughts or ask questions. Let's work together in truth and love to help people out of the bondage this issue has created.
We pick up the study here (click on the link below for the full article):
This biblical study regarding the question of divorce will look at the words of Jesus and the Apostle Paul when they spoke of divorce rights. It may come as a surprise to many Bible students that Jesus at no time stated that sexual immorality (adultery) was the ONLY "just-cause" basis for a morally lawful divorce.
...
Paul maintained that Christians have been given a "right" to peace (a right of expectation to be able to live life within a moral living environment within the framework of a peaceful, loving “relationship”) within his/her married life and conscience.
Within the time of their day (the First Century), divorce was a private matter. There were no divorce "courts."
Jesus recognized this manner of obtaining divorces.
There is no biblical reason to limit the values of marriage to sexual faithfulness alone.
The words of Jesus provide the evidence that He did not limit the moral values within marriage to human sexuality alone.
The teachings of the Apostle Paul reveals that he understood the teachings of Jesus regarding this subject.
There is no biblical reason to believe that a man or woman must stay within a marriage that is abusive of the moral standards of the God Who instituted it.
As this study will show, Paul knew and taught that there is a “just-cause” right of divorce.
Question:
What is morally required of the man or woman who divorces his/her spouse without a "just-cause" reason?
Paul's Answer:
When there is no "just-cause" and a woman or man leaves his/her husband or wife (for some other reason), that person within that context is told by Paul:
1 Corinthians 7:11 " ...(but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not send his wife away."
The words, "but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried" provide the indicator to the reader, that Paul is speaking of divorce...no person who merely left the abode of his/her spouse had a right to remarry unless they were divorced.
Paul would not have included this statement, "let her remain unmarried," if she had merely left her husband's house and support. She was being recognized by Paul as ABLE to remarry within the culture.
Paul's context reveals he is talking about people who were divorcing without “just-cause” and while they could remarry within the culture (because they were divorced) Paul was telling them that they should not remarry but be reconciled or remain unmarried (Paul is giving the logical implications to divorcing without "just-cause"... their first objective should be to reconcile - if posssible).
Further, the implications of Paul’s response to his admonition to “remain unmarried or be reconciled” within this divorced situation supports the concept that to divorce for no “just-cause” reason (as it frees the spouse to remarry), places the burden of a quick resolution for reconciliation upon the spouse who left the marriage without “just-cause.”
Remarriage
Paul's letters provide further support of his understanding of the teachings of Jesus regarding a “just-cause” basis for divorce and remarriage (i.e., that remarriage becomes an automatic right upon divorce).
Paul speaks of a divorce right centering upon immoral choices within marriage (one cause, being a divorce via abandonment of a marriage through an unjust divorce action);
1 Corinthians 7:15
"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."
The word, "bondage" used here is, "doulos" meaning to "enslave - bring into (be under) bondage, given, become (make) servant."
Inherent within the meaning of the word, "doulos" is - "...in contrast to a personal partnership in marriage, it is used for an absolute, servile obligation in I Corth 7:15." - Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament - Vol. 1 - T & T Clark (publishing house).
By Paul using this word by noting the divorced spouse, was "NOT" under "doulos," [bondage] he provides a statement that this was a divorce by a spouse leaving for no “just-cause” and he was speaking clearly that the remaining, now non-married spouse is NOT under "doulos" --- to such unjust servile obligation (bondage).
Both Jesus' and Paul's choice of words (when speaking regarding divorce rights), supports the truth that, one person does not make a marriage.
Paul's position is implicitly expressive of the word Jesus Christ chose to use regarding "except it be for"...(a just-cause) in His response to the question regarding divorce rights.
When a spouse is divorced via a no “just-cause” reason (by the spouse who leaves), Paul was teaching that there was (is) no longer a marriage.
Marriage was never intended to be a slavery to immorality (Both Jesus and the Apostle Paul taught that Christians are NOT under bondage to such situations).
Whether it be criminal behavior, an unjust divorce-abandonment of the marriage, a loss of relationship rights, deceitful living, a self-entitling "empowerment" which attacks the right to a "self" of the spouse or an unrelenting physical abuse, a non-changing emotionally abusive environment, a rage-filled, non-peace that controls the marriage climate (emotional terrorism) or sexual immorality, Christians have a right to divorce.
When Paul wrote that the now-abandoned Christian (divorced unjustly) is called to peace and a Christian is not required to attempt to hold onto that spouse, he was teaching that this person has a right to remarry.
Paul taught that a marriage was a "relationship" in Christ, not a life sentence to the immoral choices of a spouse.
Along with Jesus, the apostle Paul, upheld this reality, (that marriage is not one person doing a solo act), through this letter to the local community of Christians who had marriages being abandoned by one spouse within those marriages.
To understand our liberty under the New Covenant does not mean that any Christian has a moral right to trivialize the marriage agreement by divorcing without "just-cause" (or, for that matter, simply ignore the conditions within any agreement that we place our promises on through our signature and oaths).
We each answer to God for our choices (Neither Jesus nor His apostles ever instituted "divorce processes" or earthly "authorities" for Christians regarding divorce or any other matter - See Matthew 23:8-11 - We are all servants of Christ under the New Covenant which is a covenant of personal freedom under the morality of God).
Neither Jesus nor His apostles set-up “divorce professionals" within the Christian community.
Activating the divorce right was at that time a personal choice to be based on the immoral abuse of our God-given human rights within Christian morality, as taught by Jesus Christ, and remains so under the New Covenant.
When Jesus chose the word He used regarding the question of divorce rights, He was not limiting our human rights within marriage to sexual faithfulness alone:
Matthew 19:9 says, "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
Jesus Christ instituted the New Covenant to set the captives free from the eternal consequences of practicing immorality. The Holy Spirit spoke only the morality of Christ through the apostles.
Paul shows he understood the teachings of Jesus on the right to divorce for just-cause and affirmed that there is a right to have an expectation for personal peace and moral living within marriage (along with every other human-right being provided).
These human rights come from God and these rights remain within all spheres of our lives, including within marriage.
Every believer in Jesus Christ who has removed him/herself from a morally lawless past and responded to the God of the Bible by obeying the directive to "put on" Christ through baptism, is obligated to:
(according to Romans 6 & Acts 2:38)
"Be diligent [exceedingly careful] to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15
Christians are not to place unjust burdens on anyone by denying the very words of Christ and His apostles.
Jesus expressed His disdain for such arrogant people in His day, this way:
"And they tie up heavy loads, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger."
Matthew 23:4
Jesus recognized this manner of obtaining divorces.
There is no biblical reason to limit the values of marriage to sexual faithfulness alone.
The words of Jesus provide the evidence that He did not limit the moral values within marriage to human sexuality alone.
The teachings of the Apostle Paul reveals that he understood the teachings of Jesus regarding this subject.
There is no biblical reason to believe that a man or woman must stay within a marriage that is abusive of the moral standards of the God Who instituted it.
As this study will show, Paul knew and taught that there is a “just-cause” right of divorce.
Question:
What is morally required of the man or woman who divorces his/her spouse without a "just-cause" reason?
Paul's Answer:
When there is no "just-cause" and a woman or man leaves his/her husband or wife (for some other reason), that person within that context is told by Paul:
1 Corinthians 7:11 " ...(but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not send his wife away."
The words, "but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried" provide the indicator to the reader, that Paul is speaking of divorce...no person who merely left the abode of his/her spouse had a right to remarry unless they were divorced.
Paul would not have included this statement, "let her remain unmarried," if she had merely left her husband's house and support. She was being recognized by Paul as ABLE to remarry within the culture.
Paul's context reveals he is talking about people who were divorcing without “just-cause” and while they could remarry within the culture (because they were divorced) Paul was telling them that they should not remarry but be reconciled or remain unmarried (Paul is giving the logical implications to divorcing without "just-cause"... their first objective should be to reconcile - if posssible).
Further, the implications of Paul’s response to his admonition to “remain unmarried or be reconciled” within this divorced situation supports the concept that to divorce for no “just-cause” reason (as it frees the spouse to remarry), places the burden of a quick resolution for reconciliation upon the spouse who left the marriage without “just-cause.”
Remarriage
Paul's letters provide further support of his understanding of the teachings of Jesus regarding a “just-cause” basis for divorce and remarriage (i.e., that remarriage becomes an automatic right upon divorce).
Paul speaks of a divorce right centering upon immoral choices within marriage (one cause, being a divorce via abandonment of a marriage through an unjust divorce action);
1 Corinthians 7:15
"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."
The word, "bondage" used here is, "doulos" meaning to "enslave - bring into (be under) bondage, given, become (make) servant."
Inherent within the meaning of the word, "doulos" is - "...in contrast to a personal partnership in marriage, it is used for an absolute, servile obligation in I Corth 7:15." - Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament - Vol. 1 - T & T Clark (publishing house).
By Paul using this word by noting the divorced spouse, was "NOT" under "doulos," [bondage] he provides a statement that this was a divorce by a spouse leaving for no “just-cause” and he was speaking clearly that the remaining, now non-married spouse is NOT under "doulos" --- to such unjust servile obligation (bondage).
Both Jesus' and Paul's choice of words (when speaking regarding divorce rights), supports the truth that, one person does not make a marriage.
Paul's position is implicitly expressive of the word Jesus Christ chose to use regarding "except it be for"...(a just-cause) in His response to the question regarding divorce rights.
When a spouse is divorced via a no “just-cause” reason (by the spouse who leaves), Paul was teaching that there was (is) no longer a marriage.
Marriage was never intended to be a slavery to immorality (Both Jesus and the Apostle Paul taught that Christians are NOT under bondage to such situations).
Whether it be criminal behavior, an unjust divorce-abandonment of the marriage, a loss of relationship rights, deceitful living, a self-entitling "empowerment" which attacks the right to a "self" of the spouse or an unrelenting physical abuse, a non-changing emotionally abusive environment, a rage-filled, non-peace that controls the marriage climate (emotional terrorism) or sexual immorality, Christians have a right to divorce.
When Paul wrote that the now-abandoned Christian (divorced unjustly) is called to peace and a Christian is not required to attempt to hold onto that spouse, he was teaching that this person has a right to remarry.
Paul taught that a marriage was a "relationship" in Christ, not a life sentence to the immoral choices of a spouse.
Along with Jesus, the apostle Paul, upheld this reality, (that marriage is not one person doing a solo act), through this letter to the local community of Christians who had marriages being abandoned by one spouse within those marriages.
To understand our liberty under the New Covenant does not mean that any Christian has a moral right to trivialize the marriage agreement by divorcing without "just-cause" (or, for that matter, simply ignore the conditions within any agreement that we place our promises on through our signature and oaths).
We each answer to God for our choices (Neither Jesus nor His apostles ever instituted "divorce processes" or earthly "authorities" for Christians regarding divorce or any other matter - See Matthew 23:8-11 - We are all servants of Christ under the New Covenant which is a covenant of personal freedom under the morality of God).
Neither Jesus nor His apostles set-up “divorce professionals" within the Christian community.
Activating the divorce right was at that time a personal choice to be based on the immoral abuse of our God-given human rights within Christian morality, as taught by Jesus Christ, and remains so under the New Covenant.
When Jesus chose the word He used regarding the question of divorce rights, He was not limiting our human rights within marriage to sexual faithfulness alone:
Matthew 19:9 says, "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
Jesus Christ instituted the New Covenant to set the captives free from the eternal consequences of practicing immorality. The Holy Spirit spoke only the morality of Christ through the apostles.
Paul shows he understood the teachings of Jesus on the right to divorce for just-cause and affirmed that there is a right to have an expectation for personal peace and moral living within marriage (along with every other human-right being provided).
These human rights come from God and these rights remain within all spheres of our lives, including within marriage.
Every believer in Jesus Christ who has removed him/herself from a morally lawless past and responded to the God of the Bible by obeying the directive to "put on" Christ through baptism, is obligated to:
(according to Romans 6 & Acts 2:38)
"Be diligent [exceedingly careful] to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15
Christians are not to place unjust burdens on anyone by denying the very words of Christ and His apostles.
Jesus expressed His disdain for such arrogant people in His day, this way:
"And they tie up heavy loads, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger."
Matthew 23:4
(An excerpt; for the full article CLICK HERE)
Editor's questions:
1. How long should a Christian brother or sister remaign in an unbiblical marriage?
2. What is the definition of "leave?" Can a person leave a relationship and never move out?
3. Should a spouse remain with a backslidden partner for the sake of appearance?
4. Do divorced christians carry an eternal stigma on earth?
5. Does a divorced person have to live/remain alone as long as their mate lives?
6. Is it possible that the church has been teaching this incorrectly for years and that people have turned away from fellowship with believers and even from Christ because of the stigma and shame associated with the long-term teachings on this issue?
Please comment below: I am sure that this topic, evaded by many and glossed over by some, will be of great assistance to those struggling with these decisions.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
