When discussing MDR the conversation usually surrounds whether remarriage is ever permitted. And if it is, when is it permitted? The purpose of this blog is to demonstrate that inherent to a biblical divorce is the right to remarry—it's assumed. There is no other biblical purpose for divorce other than to free the parties to remarry. If divorce does not include the right to remarry, then it would differ nothing from separation.
The text that provides the basis for this idea is Deuteronomy 24:
The text that provides the basis for this idea is Deuteronomy 24:
When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. (Deuteronomy 24:1-2 KJV)
Putting away a wife without a bill of divorce put her in a bad situation. Another man could not marry and provide for her, and she couldn't provide for herself well. So to put away a wife without a bill of divorce was to deal "treacherously" with them (Malachi 2:14). It is putting away, and not divorce that God hates (See here). Therefore, to prevent men from putting their wives in this position, Moses commanded that if they were going to put away their wives that they would also give them a bill of divorcement.
There is a simple reason for commanding to give a bill of divorcement when you put away a wife: And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife (Deuteronomy 24:2). It was so that she could go marry another man! To remarry was the only purpose of the bill of divorcement. The theological conclusion then is this: if the divorce is valid then remarriage is necessarily permitted, In Jewish and biblical thought, the debate is never about whether remarriage is permitted, but whether they were given a bill of divorce when they were put away. There are the additional concerns about valid causes for divorce. But biblically, if the divorce is valid; the remarriage must also be valid. Remarriage is the purpose of divorce!
As always, all comments will be published. ESPECIALLY the opposing comments made with the reader's name.
Moses commanded to give a bill of divorce in addition to putting away one's spouse (Matthew 19:7). Why would he do that? If neither putting away (separation), nor a bill of divorce (divorce) freed the parties to remarry then why not just "put away" one's spouse? Because if they were just put away without a bill of divorce, then the marriage covenant is still binding. Therefore, if the "put away" wife were to remarry, then she and the person she married would be committing adultery (Matthew 5:32; 19:9 YLT).
Putting away a wife without a bill of divorce put her in a bad situation. Another man could not marry and provide for her, and she couldn't provide for herself well. So to put away a wife without a bill of divorce was to deal "treacherously" with them (Malachi 2:14). It is putting away, and not divorce that God hates (See here). Therefore, to prevent men from putting their wives in this position, Moses commanded that if they were going to put away their wives that they would also give them a bill of divorcement.
There is a simple reason for commanding to give a bill of divorcement when you put away a wife: And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife (Deuteronomy 24:2). It was so that she could go marry another man! To remarry was the only purpose of the bill of divorcement. The theological conclusion then is this: if the divorce is valid then remarriage is necessarily permitted, In Jewish and biblical thought, the debate is never about whether remarriage is permitted, but whether they were given a bill of divorce when they were put away. There are the additional concerns about valid causes for divorce. But biblically, if the divorce is valid; the remarriage must also be valid. Remarriage is the purpose of divorce!
As always, all comments will be published. ESPECIALLY the opposing comments made with the reader's name.
My name is Ethan Coody! I couldn't figure out how to show who I was! But I loved it. It was well said and it was so simple to understand. I've been asked a few times about divorce from my friends at school and I've never looked into it. Thanks for being an empty vessel and letting God speak through you sir!
ReplyDeleteThank you for taking the time to give your feedback. If you have enjoyed the blogs, then feel free to subscribe.
DeletePastor Calvin if I may ask, what does, " because he hath found some uncleanness in her" mean to you? Also, would you agree that when the scriptures do not directly address a specific issue, then it is reasonable to draw from the entire moral ethic of the scriptures to remedy such issues?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI would guess something less than sexual intercourse since that would likely have resulted in death.
DeleteI think I agree with your premise, but I will wait for the obvious forthcoming application.
Having discussed the issue of divorce and remarriage at great lengths with various Apostolic believers, I have come across the view that the only valid reason would be fornication (usually specifically physical fornication). I hold the view that when dealing with cases of emotional abuse/trauma, the scriptures do not address such specific issues. I have been told that divorce is permissible if there is threat of life, but that is the only other exception to fornication. As a therapist who works in a non-profit community agency, I see cases that deal with some of the most extreme issues within marital relationships. I also find myself more often than not recommending divorce. In my view, because the scriptures do not address such things as domestic violence, emotional, psychological trauma, etc., I have to look at the entirety of the scriptures and interpret what is God's will for mankind. The answer that I come up with is that it is God's will for mankind to live optimal lives. Therefore, when a person is living less than optimal lives due to such abuses, than divorce is more than necessary. I also believe that perhaps in some cases remarriage may not be God's will and maybe sin, however, it is not an unforgiveable sin which the blood of Christ cannot redeem. What are your thoughts?
ReplyDeleteps sorry for taking so long to respond, I'm at school until 10:00 pm pacific time.
1. Assuming you've read my other blogs on this issue, you know that I am not in the "fornication only" camp. I believe there are multiple valid reasons for divorce. And I believe that every valid divorce includes the freedom to remarry for both parties.
Delete2. While scripture may not deal explicitly with every form of abuse, I am not sure that scripture doesn't deal in principle with the abuse question (1 Corinthians 7.13). I am somewhat concerned with an approach to divorce and remarriage whose argument is God wants me to live an optimal life. I agree he does, but I think there is a better way to get there. Furthermore, I do believe that abuse is valid grounds. I'm on a flight now. Maybe I will go into more detail later.
3. Your point about remarrying when it is a sin to do so. My inclination is to say that marriage can never be valid before God. Because if they have not been release from their marriage covenant, then it is adultery or polygamy. But if they have been released from the covenant with the previous spouse then they are not sinning by remarrying.
DeleteOn your first response, I admit I have not read it yet. I was just recently introduced to your blog.
ReplyDeleteOn your second point I think we agree. The point of "optimal life" is merely looking at abuse, and agreeing that is not God's will.
I believe that there may be situations in which people divorce over such things like "I'm just not in love anymore." To divorce over that and remarry seems to be invalid. However, with true contrition and repentance, God is merciful and able to forgive.
In the above scenario, is the covenant with first spouse still binding? In other words was it broken since the divorce was for an invalid reasons? Just trying to sort through it.
DeleteYes it is still binding.
DeleteSo I gues this is my question: If the previous covenant is binding, and the present one is binding, then they are actively participating in multiple covenants simultaneously. It would seem to me to imply either adultery or polygamy.
DeleteSaying that they repent doesn’t eliminate the problem. They are still in more than one covenant. Or God doesn’t recognize the covenant with the second partner and are in a sense having a perpetual affair.
One can’t repent of drunkenness and keep getting drunk every night. If the second marriage is sinful, then it’s sinful as long as they continue in it.
When would you ever tell someone to “remain unmarried or be reconciled” like Paul did in 1 Cor 7?
I'm from The Rock Church in ELk Grove, CA. Heard you preach there awhile back.
ReplyDelete