A woman was watching her granddaughter play with her dolls one day. At one point the little girl staged a wedding. First, she played the role of the bride’s mother, assigning duties to everyone; then she suddenly became the bride with a teddy-bear groom.
The little girl picked up the teddy bear and then said to the minister presiding over the wedding: “Now you may read us our rights.”
Without missing a beat, the little girl then took the role of the minister and said, “You have the right to remain silent, anything you say may be held against you; you have the right to have an attorney present. You may kiss the bride.”
What an amazing perspective on marriage in our society today! Out of the mouths of babes! Sadly, many start out marriage these days already anticipating the possibility of needing an attorney present at some time in the future to execute a divorce.
The New Testament invites us to think in a different way about marriage. Listen for God’s word to you from 1 Corinthians 7:10-16…
To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.
To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
I Give This Command
In verses 10 and 11 Paul is addressing the situation of two Christians who are married to one another. Notice, what he says: “I give this command…”
It is true that Paul is giving a command here as an authoritative apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. But I also think it is very easy to make a mistake when approaching this passage, and when approaching the passages in the Gospels where Jesus addresses the topic of marriage and divorce. It is all too easy to look at Jesus or at Paul and forget that they were responding to questions posed to them. Neither Jesus nor Paul addressed every possible situation regarding marriage or divorce that might be imagined.
As N. T. Wright has said, “much of what he [Paul] says is more in the nature of wise Christian advice, based on biblical understanding, theological reflection, and pastoral experience.”
And, as we have seen already in 1 Corinthians, Paul doesn’t simply present these new believers with a bunch of dos and don’ts. Rather, he invites them to think things through for themselves. Again, Wright notes very helpfully, “If you give someone a rule, you may keep them on track for a day or two, but if you teach them to think Christianly you’ll help them to go on making the right decisions on their own.”
Not I, But The Lord
Notice, too, that Paul says, “not I, but the Lord.”
Paul does not often quote the Lord Jesus. We cannot be certain what teachings of Jesus Paul was even aware of. We must remember that Paul wrote all his letters before any of the Gospels were written.
Yet, here, Paul seems to be aware of Jesus’ teaching in Mark 10. In Mark 10:2-12 we read…
Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”
“What did Moses command you?” he replied.
They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”
“It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied. “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
Divorce was a hot issue in the first century just as it is in the twenty-first. Divorce was rampant in the Graeco-Roman world. The first century poet Martial wrote about women who had been divorced as many as ten times; and he wrote as though it was commonplace.
In the Jewish world, according to Deuteronomy 24:1, divorce could only take place if the husband found “something indecent” in his wife and then he would have to issue a certificate of divorce.
There were two schools of thought as to what “something indecent” meant. The school of Rabbi Shammai restricted it to marital unfaithfulness. The school of Rabbi Hillel allowed divorce for many more reasons, literally “any cause”, including the burning of toast at breakfast. Jesus clearly sided with the school of Shammai against the Hillel school’s “any cause” divorce. But Jesus didn’t rule out Exodus 21:10-11 which allowed divorce for neglect. However, the main thing we need to see is that Jesus took his listeners back to God’s original purpose, that two people should become one in marriage and that what God has joined together, human beings should not separate.
It is important to note that Jesus is not laying down a new law. Rather, he is expressing an ideal we should strive toward. And I believe Jesus was very interested in protecting the most vulnerable in the patriarchal society of his time: women and children. He was trying to protect women, who were treated like property, and could be divorced by their husbands at will. And Jesus was trying to protect children who could be severely harmed by divorce.
It is also important to note that Jesus says something slightly different in Matthew 19:9. There we read these words of Jesus: “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
This raises a question: did Jesus allow for divorce in the case of marital unfaithfulness or was this statement added by Matthew? Mark and Luke make the prohibition against divorce absolute. Matthew allows divorce in one instance: marital unfaithfulness. Why is there this apparent contradiction between the Gospels?
It is possible that since under Jewish law divorce was compulsory in the case of adultery Mark and Luke didn’t think they needed to mention that exception. But if forced, I would choose Mark’s reading as closer to what Jesus must have said, rather than Matthew, for Mark’s Gospel is probably the oldest. Also, the reading in Mark is the hardest and therefore to be preferred in cases like this where different texts of the same saying disagree. Furthermore, only the absolute prohibition of divorce goes along with the ideal represented in the Adam and Eve story. And only the absolute prohibition of divorce explains the disciples’ astonished response: “If this is the situation between a husband and a wife, it is better not to marry.” In other words, if there is no way out of the marriage commitment once it is made then, the disciples conclude, it is better not to marry at all.
To this Jesus responds by saying, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.” In other words, the ability to marry and stay married until death do us part is a God-given gift.
Paul was obviously familiar with the stricter of Jesus’ sayings on marriage and divorce. That is why he says, “To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband… And a husband must not divorce his wife.”
What if the wife leaves?
But then Paul goes on to consider a second situation… What if the wife separates from her husband for some reason, what should be done in that situation? We don’t know for certain, but it is possible that Paul is responding here to the situation where there is physical, emotional, or sexual abuse. Whatever the case, Paul recognizes that there are some situations where a wife must separate from her husband. “But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband.” So, in some situations, Paul allowed for separation but not divorce.
What if an unbelieving spouse leaves?
Finally, Paul goes on to consider a third situation. What if a Christian is married to a non-Christian? Paul says that this word of advice is coming from him and not from the Lord because Jesus did not address this situation during his earthly ministry.
Paul’s advice in such a situation is that the believer and the unbeliever should remain married unless the unbeliever wants to depart. If the latter is the case, then the believer should let the unbeliever go.
Paul suggests three interesting reasons why a Christian should remain with a non-Christian spouse. First, because of the fact of consecration. William Barclay comments that Paul…
… has the lovely thought that the unbelieving partner is consecrated by the believer. They two have become one flesh and the wonder is that in such a case it is not the taint of heathenism but the grace of Christianity which wins the victory. There is an infection about Christianity which involves all those who come into contact with it.
The second reason Paul gives for a Christian spouse to stay with a non-Christian partner is because of the status of the children. Paul says that such a union makes the children holy. Again, Barclay comments…
A child born into a Christian home, even into a home where only one of the partners is a Christian, is born into the family of Christ. In a partnership between a believer and an unbeliever, it is not so much that the believer is brought into contact with the realm of sin, as that the unbeliever is brought into contact with the realm of grace.
So, Paul says a believing spouse should remain with an unbelieving spouse first because of the sanctifying influence on the unbelieving spouse, second because of the sanctifying influence on their children and third, because of the possibility of conversion. Paul asks, “How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” So long as the believer remains with the unbeliever, Paul suggests, they have a better chance of winning the unbeliever to Christ. Barclay comments…
For Paul evangelization began at home. The unbeliever was to be looked on, not as something unclean to be avoided with repulsion, but as another son or daughter to be won for God. Paul knew that it is blessedly true that often human love has led to love of God.
This is not to suggest that the believing spouse should spend all their married life preaching to the unbeliever. Here the words attributed to St. Francis of Assisi are apposite: “Preach the Gospel at all times, if necessary, use words.”
Four Views on Divorce
Over the course of Christian history there have been four general views about divorce. There have been those who believe…
- Neither divorce nor remarriage are ever permitted.
- Divorce is at times permitted but never remarriage.
- Divorce and remarriage are permitted in the cases of adultery and/or desertion.
- Divorce and remarriage are permitted for a wide variety of reasons.
I think one can see from this brief survey of Scripture how each of these views finds a defense in the Bible. I agree with N. T. Wright when he says that: “We who live in many different situations never envisaged by either Jesus or Paul need wisdom, humility and faithfulness to apply their teaching afresh in our own day.”
I also find much wisdom in the words of William Barclay who said that when a marriage is failing and all…
…physical and mental and spiritual resources have been brought to bear on such a situation, and the situation remains incurable and even dangerous, then the situation should be ended; and the Church, so far, from regarding people who have been involved in such a situation as being beyond the pale, should do everything it can in strength and tenderness to help them. There does not seem any other way than that in which to bring the real Spirit of Christ to bear…
This whole matter is one to which we might well bring more sympathy and less condemnation for of all things the failure of a marriage must least be approached in legalism and most in love.
Conclusion
So, if you have been through a divorce, I would urge you to receive the Lord’s forgiveness afresh today. And if you are currently in a marriage that is struggling, allow me to offer this one recommendation. I urge you to create a marriage triangle.
Now, I know marriage triangles are not usually a good thing, but in this case it’s different. I believe every marriage needs to be composed in the shape of a triangle with the two partners as the two bottom points and Jesus as the single point at the top. I believe forming such a marriage triangle is the only way for married couples to come together in the kind of lasting unity of love and faithfulness God desires for every marriage. Keep in mind, in the triangle I am talking about, the points can move. The closer both bottom points get to the top point, the closer both spouses get to Jesus, the closer they get to each other.
As the Lord tells us in Ecclesiastes 4:12, “A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.”
Comments