Biblical Divorce And Re-Marriage

Part 2, The Ultimate Deception

Article Preview: If you just surfed into Part 2, I recomment going back to Part 1. Great news, Elohim (God) is fair! While this article came from what I would call a mainstream source, the approach is quite well balanced and extremely Biblically supported. There are a couple of peripheral comments that I would, of course, disagree with but the overall conclusion is quite uncommonly sensible.

Does that mean both spouses must live such a life based solely upon the decision of only one of the spouses? I do not think so; I do not believe God would judge that outcome to be fair to both parties involved.

Therefore, the spouse who tried, repeatedly, over a long period of time to reconcile and mend the marriage relationship should be free to divorce the spouse who has decided to live a life of celibacy and singleness.

Because if a separation between two sincere Christian believers turns into a long-term, permanent separation that denies the marital blessings of friendship and sexuality and companionship to the spouse who wishes to reunite back into their marriage, then divorce would be morally and biblically justifiable on the grounds of desertion and denial of reasonable sexual relations.

That is why it is possible—under certain extreme circumstances—for the prohibition against divorce for separated Christian couples to be superceded by higher moral values in an unavoidable clash between competing moral concerns.

Which means, for example, that if both parties portrayed in the above hypothetical situation truly remain sincere Christian believers during this long period of separation, yet they continue to find it impossible to both reconcile and reunite despite their mutual Christian love and forgiveness and biblical counseling, then divorce might ultimately be scripturally justified.

The very great danger in all of this is, of course, the reality that many Christians may want to use this line of reasoning, prematurely, to justify a divorce from their Christian spouse when, instead, they should be working very hard at reconciliation.

In other words, there should be numerous sincere attempts, over a lengthy period of time, to effect a reconciliation and reunion before either party even thinks about the possibility of divorce on the grounds of desertion.

But, if they eventually reach that stage, then the aggrieved party who tried repeatedly to reconcile and reunite would be justified, ultimately, in filing for a divorce.

Furthermore, since the aggrieved party would be blameless for the breakup of the marriage, he or she would be free to re-marry.

Obviously the other party who refused reconciliation and reunion would, of course, bear responsibility for the marital breakup if it was caused by a moral failure in their life rather than personal preferences that made continuation of the marriage relationship impossible.

However, if later during their lifetime, they were to change their mind about living in the state of matrimony, they would have to repent, sincerely, of their moral failure relative to their failed marriage, and then place their sin under the grace and mercy of God.

1 Corinthians 7:12-15 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: if any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. (KJV)

Here in this passage, Paul teaches that if an unbelieving spouse is content to remain in the marriage with the believing spouse, then the believing spouse should not leave the unbelieving spouse.

However, if the unbelieving spouse leaves the Christian believer, then the Christian believer no longer is under bondage to the marriage vows. Hence, the marriage covenant under such circumstances is broken, and the believer is free to re-marry whenever the divorce is finalized.

Of course, under Roman Law, as we saw earlier, divorce went into effect immediately upon the mere act of desertion; in our modern society, however, desertion is only grounds for a divorce, so a legal divorce would still have to be obtained.

As for situations where the unbeliever does leave the believer, I should hasten to add that the unbeliever should be leaving the believer because of the believer’s Christian faith, not because of sin and wrongdoing in the life of the believer.

If the believer is guilty of any misbehavior that is threatening to destroy the marriage, then every reasonable attempt at forgiveness and reconciliation should be tried in order to save the marriage if at all possible.

Someone might argue that 1 Corinthians 7:12 clearly states that this passage of scripture reflects the apostle Paul’s opinion, and not God’s.

But Paul, generally, was speaking under the authority and inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit while writing his letter to the Corinthians, even though, in this instance, he was not expressing a direct commandment from God Himself.

However, he was exercising the personal judgment and knowledge and insight with which God had blessed him on a specific issue of great interest.

So, in fact, this passage is not a false representation of God’s Will as some might claim, but a valid part of Scripture as confirmed by Christian councils and translators down through the centuries of time since the inception of Christianity.

Sometimes it is said that 1 Corinthians 7:12-15 does not say that a Christian believer may re-marry if they are deserted or divorced by their unbelieving spouse. But, in 1 Corinthians 7:15, Paul said that “if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases ....”

Obviously the phrase “not under bondage” can only mean that the believing spouse no longer is under bondage to the marriage covenant, under such circumstances, because it is invalidated and made non-existent by the unbelieving spouse when they either desert the believing marriage partner or divorce them without just, biblical cause and against their will.

Therefore, in such instances, a believer no longer is bound to the marriage covenant, and is free to re-marry once the divorce has been finalized.

The author of the book of Romans also briefly addresses the issue of marriage and re-marriage:

Romans 7:1-3 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. (KJV)

Compare the following parallel passage:

1 Corinthians 7:39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord. (KJV)

In other words, if the spouse of the Christian believer dies, then the Christian is free to re-marry. This is all that the preceding passages are saying; nothing more.

So, they do not mean that if a person is victimized by their spouse through an unjust divorce, they can never re-marry so long as their spouse who divorced them, without cause, remains alive.

Instead, we must apply everything which the Bible teaches about divorce and re-marriage to the above passages in order to ascertain the highest level of understanding possible regarding God’s truth on this matter.

Now, we come to one last thorny issue which, unfortunately, is far too prevalent in today’s society. The question involves whether or not a person is biblically justified in getting a divorce in order to protect their health or life from physical or psychological abuse that is inflicted upon them by their spouse.

My forthcoming philosophical and theological arguments will be in the affirmative.

Thus, in my view, a person is justified, morally and scripturally, in getting a divorce under the extreme circumstances we have just described.

Because I am persuaded that no moral principle is completely autonomous to itself. That is why Christians say that God is a God of love and mercy, but also a God of justice and judgment. However, complexity, not contradiction, is involved in such instances.

In other words, whenever moral laws and principles come into direct and unavoidable conflict with each other, and due to circumstances, it is impossible to comply with all of them, it is our moral duty and obligation to choose the highest level of good possible.

For example, if telling a lie was the only way possible to save an innocent life from death, then obviously you should do so because the higher law (preservation of innocent life) should take precedence over the lower law (truth), as in the following biblical example:

Joshua 2:3-4 And the king of Jericho sent unto Rahab, saying, ‘bring forth the men that are come to thee, which are entered into thine house: for they be come to search out all the country. 4 And the woman took the two men, and hid them, and said thus, ‘there came men unto me, but I wist not whence they were: (KJV)

Hebrews 11:31 By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace. (KJV)

James 2:25-26 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? 26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. (KJV)

The preceding scriptures we have just read portray an example whereby God accounted an individual as righteous when they were forced to tell a lie in order to save the lives of innocent human beings. Now compare this example with the following one:

Exodus 1:15-21 And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives, of which the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah: 16 And he said, ‘when ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live. 17 But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive. 18 And the king of Egypt called for the midwives, and said unto them, ‘why have ye done this thing, and have saved the men children alive? 19 And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women; for they are lively, and are delivered ere the midwives come in unto them. 20 Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty. 21 And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that he made them houses. (KJV)

Here is yet another example where God looked very favorably upon individuals who lied in order to save innocent human life. The midwives, in this instance, very courageously lied to the Pharaoh because it was the only practical way of saving the innocent Hebrew babies from being slaughtered.

Likewise, the following scripture illustrates the morality of being forced to kill a thief who is in the process of robbing you and possibly even threatening your life:

Exodus 22:1-2 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep. 2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him. (KJV)

The following passage actually portrays God instructing an innocent individual to lie so that he would not be killed unfairly and unjustly.

Some people might argue that God did not really tell Samuel to lie because when Samuel told anyone that he was there to make a sacrifice to the Lord (as God instructed him to do if anyone should inquire as to why he was going to Bethlehem), he was telling the truth.

But truth-telling, in its fullest, complete sense of the meaning, is not necessarily limited to the strict semantic sense of the words employed by a person, but rather, it is the impression or message which a person intends for his audience to receive when he or she is communicating ideas through words and gestures and overall demeanor.

That is why in our judicial system, a person promises to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

A seemingly redundant pledge of this type is necessary because it is very possible to deceive people by giving only completely truthful statements while still withholding vital information which prevents the audience from understanding the entire situation correctly.

But, sometimes, making truthful statements in order to deceive someone about the whole truth of a matter, as in the following example, is morally justifiable because they involve situations where one is forced by circumstances to choose between two evil actions or consequences in an effort to choose the highest level of good possible when no completely good options exist:

1 Samuel 16:1-5 And the LORD said unto Samuel, ‘how long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? Fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons. 2 And Samuel said, ‘how can I go? If Saul hear it, he will kill me. And the LORD said, ‘take an heifer with thee, and say, I am come to sacrifice to the LORD. 3 And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will shew thee what thou shalt do: and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name unto thee. 4 And Samuel did that which the LORD spake, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the town trembled at his coming, and said, ‘comest thou peaceably’? 5 And he said, ‘peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the LORD: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice. (KJV)

The following scriptures illustrate the truth that there is a hierarchy of moral values in that some moral laws are more important than other moral laws:

John 19:11 Jesus answered, ‘thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. (KJV)

Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (KJV)

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. (KJV)

Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. (KJV)

Acts 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, ‘we ought to obey God rather than men. (KJV)

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. (KJV)

Hebrews 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son .... (KJV)

Compare the following scriptures which state that Jesus was sinless and without blemish:

Hebrews 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. (KJV)

I John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (KJV)

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. (KJV)

1 Peter 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: (KJV)

Now compare the preceding scriptures, which say that Jesus was sinless, with the following passage portraying Jesus as disobedient and unresponsive to His parents’ wishes when they conflicted with God’s wishes:

Luke 2:44-49 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day’s journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. 45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him. 46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. 47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. 48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, ‘son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? Behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. 49 And he said unto them, ‘how is it that ye sought me? Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business? (KJV)

Finally, I think we have established beyond any reasonable doubt that there does exist a hierarchy of moral values which should govern all of our moral decisions in life.

Accordingly, in those instances where our health or life truly is threatened by physical or psychological violence from our spouse, the moral laws of self-preservation and self-defense rights which are derived from the very right to life itself—supercede the moral law of marriage, and we should get a divorce from our abusive and violent spouse as quickly as possible (compare: Matthew 10:23; Exodus 21:26-27; etc.)

This very same principle also explains why earlier we saw that God said divorce was permissible in extreme marital situations that involve neglect by a spouse in matters pertaining to food, clothing and reasonable sexual love.

Therefore, even though God places a very high value on the institution of marriage, it is possible for extreme circumstances involving fornication, adultery, violence, abuse, neglect and desertion to justify a divorce action.

However, the Bible does not always come right out and say precisely what we should do in a wide variety of domestic abuse situations because it would be almost impossible to write a book that would give such completely detailed, explicit moral instructions for every possible contingency in life.

Obviously the potential number of such situations would approach infinity itself, so size, alone, would prohibit such a vast undertaking.

Instead, the Bible gives us basic moral principles to weigh and balance against each other, carefully and honestly, in order to determine what we should do in a given situation.

In other words, biblical moral principles are intended simply to serve as general guidelines, only; it is up to us to apply them properly and diligently in a rational and honest manner.

Accordingly, in any case of alleged physical or mental abuse, here are some of the moral laws which we should consider when making our decision on whether or not we are biblically justified in seeking a divorce:

(1) God hates divorce, i.e., the violation or breaking of one’s wedding vows;

(2) The Bible specifically states that adultery, fornication, desertion by a non-believer, non-support and lack of reasonable spousal rights all are legitimate reasons for divorce;

(3) Many scriptures clearly illustrate the basic moral principle that we always should violate the lower moral law if that is the only way possible (within reason) to comply with a higher moral law because no good, alternative option is available to us. In other words, for example, we are obligated morally to tell a lie if that is the only way possible to save an innocent person from being killed.

(4) We have the God-given right to life, and that precious right obviously includes the right to protect and defend our lives against danger and harm. Naturally, we always should utilize the lowest level of force or flight necessary to eliminate any threat which might be arrayed against us.

Accordingly, in any situation involving physical or mental abuse, or the threat thereof, an absolutely honest and realistic assessment of all relevant circumstances is necessary if we are to determine whether we truly are confronted with a realistic threat to our health or life.

This means, for instance, that angry disagreements between marriage partners, and other such things, are not sufficient reason for seeking a divorce. Instead, both parties should strive sincerely and honestly to work out their differences while re-kindling their love and commitment for each other.

Because most marriages encounter problems, sooner or later, but since everyone promises to marry “for better or for worse, in sickness and in health,” divorce should not be viewed as a first option as soon as there is any sign of unhappiness or discontent in the marriage.

Therefore, hurt feelings or feelings of frustration are not sufficient grounds for a biblical divorce.

But, on the other hand, realistic threats to our health or life, such as physical beatings or systematic patterns of mental torture designed to destroy or incapacitate us, are legitimate reasons for leaving a spouse and subsequently seeking a divorce from them.

Of course, only the victims of psychological abuse can decide, honestly, if the constant barrage of invective and hatred by their spouse rises to a level of mental cruelty that seriously jeopardizes their emotional and physical health.

Because it is one thing to engage in heated arguments or disputes with your spouse occasionally, but quite another matter if your spouse attacks you verbally—unmercifully, continually—so that you always are near your breaking point.

In such instances, a divorce is biblically justified because the higher moral/biblical values of survival and self-defense take priority over the lower moral/biblical value that prohibits divorce.

Hence, biblical divorces are not limited to just cases of spousal adultery; they also are justified in clear, obvious cases involving psychological and/or physical abuse!

In such instances, the victim of abuse may also want to consult with two or three reputable, experienced Christian counselors or ministers who can advise them regarding their situation.

For as the Bible says, there is safety in a multitude of counselors or advisors:

Proverbs 11:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety. (KJV)

Proverbs 15:22 Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors they are established. (KJV)

Proverbs 24:6 For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war: and in multitude of counsellors there is safety. (KJV)

Furthermore, after the victim of the abuse has obtained their biblically-justified divorce, they become a single person once again in God’s eyes, so they are free to re-marry if they wish to do so.

However, please keep in mind that God knows our every thought and emotion; nothing is hidden from Him.

So, if we decide that divorce is a biblically permissible solution in a given marital situation, especially in highly-subjective situations involving alleged mental torture, we should make certain, in our own mind, that we honestly can look at God on Judgment Day and say we truly believed our life or health, physically or emotionally, was seriously and realistically threatened by our spouse.

Sometimes people say in such instances that the offended party simply should get a separation, not a divorce.

However, aside from the fact the Bible does not say this, the stark reality in life is that violent, abusive people seldom, if ever, suddenly reform their behavior unless they receive a miraculous transformation through the saving grace of Christ Jesus, our Lord and Saviour.

Therefore, it is not fair to condemn the victim of abuse to a lifetime of constant fear, threats, danger, loneliness and frustration simply because they had the misfortune or poor judgment to marry such an evil, violent person.

For God has not called us to be pitiful, abused doormats, but to life, and life abundantly. (John 10:10).

This point is completely harmonious with the teaching in the epistles that just as Christ is head of the church, so likewise should the husband be the head of his wife and family, and should love and cherish his wife and family just as Christ loves and cherishes the body of believers. (Ephestians 5:23).

Accordingly, a proper biblical view of marriage precludes the violent, abusive relationship that so many modern marriages endure. (Compare: Matthew 10:23; Exodus 21:26-27; etc.)

Although God hates divorce (Jer. 3:1; Mal 2:14-16; Mark 10:2-12), it is morally and scripturally justified under certain adverse conditions because a higher moral law supercedes a lower moral law in the biblical hierarchy of moral values.

Before concluding, I want to emphasize the truth that if a person has been guilty of committing adultery sometime during their past, they still are free to re-marry under certain conditions.

If, for example, at some point in time after committing adultery, they honestly and sincerely dedicate or re-dedicate their life to God by truly repenting of their past sins and asking for His forgiveness, here is what Jesus said:

John 8:3-11 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 they say unto him, ‘Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, ‘he that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, ‘woman, where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, ‘no man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, ‘neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. (KJV)

Thus, whenever a person sincerely accepts Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour, they become a new creature in Christ with a clean moral slate (since they have been forgiven).

In like manner, when a person re-dedicates their life to God after praying for His forgiveness, all of their past sins and mistakes are wiped away, leaving them pure and spotless through the saving grace of Christ Jesus.

Then, after that person has been forgiven, God expects them to make a “good-faith” effort, through the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit, to obey the commandments of Christ to the best of their ability. That is why Jesus said: “Go, and sin no more.”

But, whenever we do fail, we should pray for His forgiveness, and keep on trying as best we can to be in His will at all times.

So, I believe God always forgives us whenever we repent of our sins sincerely and honestly.

Consequently, although some people might disagree with me on this point, I do not believe God demands that divorced people who have been forgiven for their sin of adultery must remain single and alone for the rest of their natural lives.

Instead, if they truly have repented of their past failures, and are very determined and resolute about not committing that type of sin again, I believe they are free to re-marry as forgiven sinners under the grace of God.

Accordingly, as the book of Romans argues, God’s grace and forgiveness is not something we should take advantage of just because God always stands ready to forgive us if we sincerely repent of our moral failures.

Rather, we always should strive to do our very best not to engage in that particular type of sin ever again; most certainly we should not act in a cavalier manner, committing the same sin over and over again, knowing full-well we can always take refuge in God’s willingness to forgive us.

Thus, even though we live under God’s grace and forgiveness, we do have a moral obligation to do our very best not to commit the same horrendous sin again.

Therefore, new Christians or re-dedicated Christians may have committed terrible sins, including adultery, during their “old” life in sin, but since they are getting a “fresh” start in Christ Jesus, they make restitution wherever possible and practical, and then go forward with their lives, determined to do their very best with the help and guidance of the Holy Spirit to sin no more.

Furthermore, they start their new lives in Christ in whatever marital state they happen to be in at the time of their conversion to Christ, and conduct their affairs thereafter accordingly:

I Corinthians 7:20 Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called. (KJV)

This means that whatever our life circumstances are at the moment we dedicate or re-dedicate our lives to Christ, that is the point from which we start conforming our activities and thoughts to His commandments.

So, if a new Christian or a re-dedicated Christian is single in marital status at the time their new life in Christ begins, then they are free to marry or re-marry if they wish to do so. Nor is it necessary for such an individual, who has been divorced from a previous marriage, to re-marry their former spouse in a misguided attempt to “atone” for a past mistake.

Likewise, if a new Christian or a re-dedicated Christian is married when they begin their new life in Christ, they should remain married to their current spouse. They should not divorce their spouse in order to re-marry a former spouse.

That is one of the reasons why the apostle Paul also said we should put our past sins and mistakes behind us, and press on toward the future in Christ Jesus:

Philipptians 3:13-14 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, 14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. (KJV)

Therefore, in conclusion, the Bible says that divorce is biblically permissible whenever:

Recommended website for building or restoring love in marriages...The Marriage Builders