Afterword
Conclusions and future perspectives on the Church's long overdue divorce reckoning
This newsletter is a draft afterword for an upcoming eBook on the scandal of Church-sanctioned divorce. If you haven’t already done so, please check out chapters I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII, as well as the preface and appendices A and B.
A note to our readers
We realize that the contents of this book may carry major implications for many of our readers’ marriages, or those of their friends and family. At the close of this volume, we wanted to address these readers directly, given the challenging and sensitive nature of the topics at hand.
Perhaps some of you have become convinced in the course of reading this book that either you or your loved ones have entered into marriages that are unlawful in God’s sight. As we can personally attest, this realization can be deeply unsettling. If you find yourself in this position, we would like to offer you first, our advice and encouragement, and second, our prayers.
First, if you have felt convicted as you have read, thought, and prayed through the arguments presented here, and the teachings we have brought forth ring true to you as rightly representing the holy character of God as attested to in the scriptures, then you are almost certainly experiencing the work of the Holy Spirit who was sent into the world for these very purposes (John 16:8–11, 13, 14):
“And when He [the Holy Spirit] comes, He will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see Me no longer; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. […] When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth, for He will not speak on his own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak, and He will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for He will take what is Mine and declare it to you.”
This is what Jesus meant when He said “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me” (John 10:27). If you are personally encountering what these verses are describing, then we urge you, do not to quench the Spirit’s work in your life through continued unbelief and disobedience (John 20:27b; Acts 7:51; Ephesians 2:1, 2; 1 Thessalonians 5:19–22)—instead, repent and trust in Christ by turning from your sin and putting your faith into action through obedience to His commands (Matthew 28:20a; Mark 1:15; John 6:29, 14:15; Acts 2:38, 16:31). In other words, today, if you hear the voice of your Shepherd, follow Him (John 10:1–18; Hebrews 3:15). You will never regret it.
Know that you are neither the first nor the last person to find him or herself in such a situation: You are not alone (Matthew 28:20b; John 16:32; 1 Corinthians 10:13; see also footnote 44 below). If we turn to God in repentance and faith-filled obedience, He will not leave us to fend for ourselves (John 14:15–21):
“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him. You know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Yet a little while and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you also will live. In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. Whoever has My commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him.”
God gives the Holy Spirit to empower believers to accomplish His will (Acts 1:8). This is why the Spirit is referred to as the great Comforter, Strengthener, Counselor, Supporter, and Advocate of our souls (John 14:16, 26, 15:26, 16:7). Ask God for the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:13; cf. Matthew 7:11), and you will find the strength you need to do what He’s asking you to do.
Second, if you are facing difficult, weighty decisions in your life regarding your marriage, or the marriages of your loved ones, then we are committed to earnestly praying for you, asking for wisdom and guidance on your behalf (James 1:5).
We are committed to rejoicing, and weeping with you (Romans 12:15), to bearing your burdens, as the Lord did ours (Isaiah 53:4a), and so fulfilling the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2). Jesus, “the man of sorrows” (Isaiah 53:3), wept over the troubles of His friends and countrymen (Matthew 23:37-39; Luke 19:41–44; John 11:35). Surely His followers must do the same (Matthew 10:24; Luke 6:40; John 13:16, 15:20).
Below is a prayer that expresses our heartfelt desire for each of you as you work out your salvation in fear and trembling before the God who is at work in all believers both to will and to do of His good pleasure (Philippians 2:12, 13).
Father, hear the cries of Your desperate, wandering sheep (Isaiah 53:6). We are in a peril of our own making (Colossians 3:5, 6). We have foolishly spurned Your truth and have gone after lies (Romans 1:25). We are ashamed at what we have become (Psalm 83:16). We are appalled at how we have misrepresented Your holy ways to a watching world (Ezra 9:3).
In Your sheer mercy, seek and save us (Luke 19:10; Matthew 18:12; Luke 15:4). Run to our aid (Luke 15:20). Send strong support (2 Chronicles 16:9). Guide us through the valley of the shadow of death into safe pastures once more (Psalm 23:1–4). Fill us with true understanding in the knowledge of You (Proverbs 9:10). Teach us to do Your will (Deuteronomy 29:29; Psalm 143:10). Incline our hearts to obey Your commands (Psalm 119:33–40). Restore in us the joy of Your salvation and sustain us with willing spirits (Psalm 51:12).
Do all of this because You love Christ and take pity on us for His sake (John 17:26; Ephesians 4:32), all for the sake of Your great name (Isaiah 48:9–11), amen.
Where do we go from here?
Now that we have made our case for the Biblical ban on divorce and adulterous remarriage, the question that naturally remains before is “Where do we go from here?”
We have begun addressing individual responses above, but how should we respond corporately, as a Church? What moves should our churches and leaders make given what we have uncovered in our investigations here?
Based on our reported findings, we at the League of Believers are setting forth five overall recommendations for how the Church should move forward on divorce and remarriage:
Churches must declare a moratorium on counseling couples to divorce and performing unlawful remarriages, effective immediately.
Although ideal and long overdue, it would be unrealistic to expect all churches to instantly adopt a permanent prohibition on divorce and unlawful remarriage. Most Church leaders are either unconvinced, unprepared, or unqualified to institute such a drastic change in ministerial policy all at once. A paradigm shift of this magnitude will take a fair amount of time, study, and prayer to complete, much less implement.
However, given the dire condition of the American Church, as well as the danger of its ongoing encouragement of highly consequential life decisions based on shaky scriptural suppositions (see recommendation 3. below), prudence demands, at minimum, an immediate cessation of advising divorce and marrying individuals whose former spouse is living.
Although these will undoubtedly prove difficult steps to take, such a moratorium would provide Church leaders the time and space necessary to re-examine their policies and bring them into alignment with scripture and best practices in pastoral ministry (see recommendation 3. below). Although there is little debate over what Jesus meant with the words “what God has joined together, let man not separate” (Matthew 19:6; Mark 10:9), there is clearly no consensus among Christian pastors, teachers, and scholars on how best to understand the Matthean “exception clauses” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9).1 So long as this is the case, churches should freeze all activities that would facilitate divorce and/or unlawful remarriage based on these, and similar verses (e.g., 1 Corinthians 7:15).
This moratorium will also provide opportunities to inform couples considering divorce and/or morally-suspect remarriages of the Biblical passages on these subjects and the various interpretive strategies for making sense of them.2 Such encounters can serve as a much needed screening mechanism for preventing, or at least discouraging future divorces and/or unlawful remarriages from occurring.
Church leaders must emphasize that Jesus’ commands against divorce and remarriage are rules to obey rather than mere ideals to aspire to.
Marriage for life must once again be treated in our churches as the real-world, boots-on-the-ground, everyday norm that all ordinary Christians are expected to adhere to, rather than an extra credit assignment for super saints that is beyond the reach of the rest of us.
Jesus treated marriage as instituted by God in the Garden of Eden prior to the fall as the natural, creation law standard for all peoples, for all time. More than a standard to aim at, Jesus saw the marriage covenant as a binding, inescapable, divine reality that held sway over the rulings of all human courts and legislatures combined—indeed, even over the legal precedent of divorce concessions in the law of Moses itself!3
Unless we recover Jesus’ high and holy rules for marriage, and resolve to hold both ourselves and our people accountable to them as a matter of unyielding principle, we will only further capitulate to the perennial demands of fallen human flesh and the ever-present cult of no-fault divorce.
Churches must adopt clear, consistent standards on divorce and remarriage that apply equally across the board.
This recommendation stands in stark contrast to the received wisdom of modern Christian leaders, whose writings are littered with talk of “case by case” judgments. Assiduously avoiding universal statements, such leaders are loathe to state any principle relating to divorce and remarriage firmly and absolutely. “It depends” is a favorite fallback answer of theirs.
But as others have noted, this approach smacks of Joseph Fletcher’s “situational ethics,” where universally binding principles are eschewed for individually tailored, circumstantial accommodations.4 On this view, even God’s laws can be set aside if that’s what it takes to do the most “loving” thing in a given situation.
Christians must reject this misguided, double-minded approach (Psalm 119:113; James 1:5–8) and return to the case law model of ethical jurisprudence provided to us in the Old Testament. In this approach, universally binding moral principles, such as those found in the Ten Commandments, are impartially applied to particular situations based on direct scriptural precedent or reasonable inferences from similar cases.5
Of course, applying such principles appropriately requires taking into consideration all the pertinent details of each individual case. However, this is not done to determine whether to apply the universal principle in question, but rather how to apply it.
We can no longer sound an uncertain bugle on divorce and remarriage in the Church (1 Corinthians 14:8).6 If there is any uncertainty, any possibility that the divorce-permissive views are incorrect, then we should err to the side of caution and advise our people accordingly.7
Churches must cease condoning divorce on “biblical grounds,” and instead limit pastoral discussions to when separation is or is not merited.
Church leaders must make an intentional, concerted effort to rid their pastoral lexicons of terms like “divorce” and “exceptions” altogether, and instead speak only of “separation” where appropriate.
Taking divorce off the table of acceptable Christian options will shift the focus of marriage counselling from building subjective, ad hoc cases for or against divorce and/or remarriage to formulating strategies for reconciliation or faithful singleness, as the case may be.
Churches must cease the confusing practice of forbidding adulterous remarriages on the one hand while forbidding the dissolution of these same unlawful marriages once formed on the other hand.
If the Church is to take a firm, flat-footed stand against adulterous remarriage, it can no longer send mixed signals by telling individuals “Do not enter unlawful unions, but if you do, you must remain in them.”10
This is not what Paul meant when he advised new converts to remain in the life status they found themselves in when they were called.11
This position has been, and always will be, a clear non sequitur, for if marrying a divorcee whose former spouse is living is the sin of adultery, what magically transforms the marriage that issues from such a union into something other than adultery?
This stance also creates a slippery slope for further compromise on other forms of unlawful marriage, for if we adopt such a policy on adulterous unions, then what other unholy unions are we willing to condemn on the front end as sinful, only to condone on the back end as something holy, good, and worthy of blessing?12
God can forgive adultery, if it is renounced and forsaken, but He cannot bless adultery. If we want to have it both ways, then we are hypocrites, pure and simple. You can’t bless a married couple whose unlawful wedding you refused to perform in your church! To claim otherwise is to make God out to be the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33).
Words to the wise
In the course of writing this book, we have made some observations on the topics of divorce and remarriage that have been helpful to us. The retrospective that follows is part proverbial sayings, part end-of-epistle exhortations, both geared toward Christians who are committed to seeking the truth on these matters.
On interpreting the New Testament divorce texts
Getting home
Bill Heth, who has contributed a great deal to the scholarly literature on the topic of divorce and remarriage, shared the following saying of his: “I have always taught my Greek exegesis students that when it comes to validating exegetical problems, grammar gets you into the ball park, and sometimes gets you on base, but it will never get you to home plate.”13
Having carefully studied the Greek of the “exception clauses,” as well as exposing myself to the different schools of thought on how best to translate them, I am convinced that the Greek translation and accompanying exegesis that we have presented in this book not only get us into the ballpark, but lands us safely on base.14 And we’re not just eking out a single here; we’re talking a triple, or at least a double, in my estimation. Combine this with our arguments from the rest of scripture, as well as Church history, and you’ve got yourself trotting comfortably to home plate.
That said, as important as understanding the original language and syntax is, arguments based on Greek translation alone are insufficient to turn hearts and minds around on this topic. Thomas Aquinas famously said “For those with faith, no evidence is necessary; for those without it, no evidence will suffice.” For those with deeply entrenched doctrinal, denominational, and/or personal commitments on divorce and remarriage, nothing short of an act of God will move the needle on this topic (1 Corinthians 2:14). Without the overriding persuasion of the Holy Spirit, what else is man left to but his innate, sinful confirmation bias, imposing onto scripture the very meaning he wanted to hear all along?
Yes, Greek is important, but it won’t put runs on the board.
Anterior motives
When reading scholarly literature on the topic of divorce and remarriage, one is struck by just how divergent the opinions can be at many points.
Why is that?
Many will cite linguistic ambiguities, historical incongruities, and personal animosities. But there’s an even deeper level of analysis, one that Leslie McFall put his finger on during the course of his studies: “Not all scholars have faith (2 Thess. 3:2 cf. Rom. 12:3) and a little leaven of unbelief will produce very different results.”15
The writer of the book of Hebrews tells us that “without faith it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6a). Applying this principle to Biblical hermeneutics,16 we discover that unless we come to the text of scripture full of faith, we are liable to make complete hash of it. Unbelief can approach a text that is plainly written against a particular sin and walk away with free and clear permission for that sin. Belief, however, studies the same text and comes to the opposite conclusion. The twelve Israelites spies sent to scout out the promised land each took in the same intel, yet Caleb and Joshua came to a vastly different conclusion than the other ten (Numbers 13).
As Athanasius noted, unless the one who approaches the writings of the holy saints is himself holy, he is likely to misread them altogether:17
“But for the searching and right understanding of the Scriptures there is need of a good life and a pure soul, and for Christian virtue to guide the mind to grasp, so far as human nature can, the truth concerning God the Word. One cannot possibly understand the teaching of the saints unless one has a pure mind and is trying to imitate their life. [..] anyone who wishes to understand the mind of the sacred writers must first cleanse his own life, and approach the saints by copying their deeds. Thus united to them in the fellowship of life, he will both understand the things revealed to them by God […].”
The Apostles said much the same thing. For example, Peter stated (2 Peter 3:16b):
“There are some things in them [i.e., Paul’s letters] that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.”
And Paul noted (Titus 1:15):
“To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled.”
It is amazing how excuses for divorce and remarriage can be found almost anywhere in scripture if one is determined enough to find them. Even in the hands of learned, albeit wrongheaded Christian exegetes, the “sacred eloquence” of the inspired authors can be twisted into nothing more than “sacred license” (1 Peter 2:16). Innocent statements are subjected to “fine-sounding arguments” (Colossians 2:4), infusing them with meanings the original authors never dreamed of.
When you see this sort of malfeasance happening, you have to pause and ask yourself: “Is this interpreter motivated by a desire to vindicate God’s holiness, or to validate man’s fallenness?”
The answer should be obvious. Such motives are more anterior than ulterior.
Wise as doves, harmless as serpents
Jesus told his followers to be “be wise as serpents and harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16b), not useful idiots for the devil.18 In what many consider to be one of His more perplexing parables, Jesus said the following regarding a shifty, underhanded manager (Luke 16:8, emphasis mine):
“The master commended the dishonest manager for his shrewdness. For the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light.”
Reading the various Christian takes on the Bible’s divorce texts demonstrates this principle in spades. Christians should know better than to work so strenuously, so counterproductively against their own cause by defending a debilitating practice like divorce.
So why do we go to such great lengths in justifying divorce, rather than pouring our energies into protecting marriage? Why do we improvise backdoor escape hatches when we should be barricading the front door? Where are the clever for the kingdom, the shrewd for salvation? Are we so foolish as to think that we can build the household of faith by destroying the foundations of our households (Matthew 12:25; Mark 3:25)? As God said of His people through the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 4:22):
“For My people are foolish; they know Me not; they are stupid children; they have no understanding. They are ‘wise’—in doing evil! But how to do good they know not.”
While we Christians have become experts in cooking up half-baked legal dodges, we are largely clueless when it comes to rightly dividing God’s holy, righteous, and good standards (Romans 7:12; 2 Timothy 2:15). Rather than wasting our time and effort devising clever outs from the marriage covenant, and thereby shooting ourselves in the collective foot, Christians should busy themselves devising ingenious ways to encourage marital faithfulness and reconciliation (2 Samuel 14:14).
Otherwise, we will remain in the paradoxical condition in which we now find ourselves: being wise as doves, and harmless as serpents.
The power of parsimony
Ockham's razor, also known as parsimony, holds that the simplest explanation is the best explanation.19 In other words, a complex explanation requiring numerous steps (or leaps, as it were), special conditions, and questionable assumptions is unlikely to be true. Conversely, a straightforward explanation based on only a few well-founded premises is likely to be correct.
The basic interpretation of the New Testament divorce texts that we have put forward here is the most parsimonious explanation going today. We do not say this in a self-congratulatory manner, since we are by no means to the first or only ones to propose this interpretation. The fact is, even critics of our position admit that, if true, it does provide a neat and tidy solution to the apparent contradictions entailed by “divorce exceptions.”20
When studying this topic for yourself, just compare what we’ve presented in this book to the stances offered by the other camps and ask yourself “What is simplest, most elegant solution for making sense of all the relevant Biblical facts on divorce and remarriage?”
The “exemption/exclusion” clause interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew’s so-called “exception clauses” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9) bring these verses into complete alignment with all other scriptural and historical data points;21 the “exception clause” interpretation puts these texts on a collision course with literally everything else we know from these data sets. It’s the difference between a seamless merger into traffic and a fifty-car pile up on I-95.
That’s the power of parsimony: the simpler, the better.
Signal vs noise
One may disagree with our solution for harmonizing the New Testament divorce texts, but one can hardly deny that the preponderance of evidence lies on our side. Typically, pro-divorce Christians posit one, or at most two or three verses as supporting their position: Matthew 5:32, 19:9, and 1 Corinthians 7:15. That’s it.
By contrast, we have provided what we believe to be compelling reasons from these same verses as well as from all of scripture that these passages do not represent “exceptions” as many have mistakenly understood them.
That said, even if we were to grant, for the sake of argument, that these verses are true anomalies, genuine outliers from the dataset, a reasonable data analytics approach would still argue that the signal (“Don’t divorce!”) to noise (“Except maybe in this case?”) ratio is heavily skewed in favor of the signal. It’s simply bad statistical practice to toss out a massive pile of data points that support the rule in favor of a few potential, or even actual deviations from the rule. To put it another way, the texts for marriage and against divorce are simply too numerous and clear-cut to justify siding with a few debatable aberrations.
In the real world, no data set behaves perfectly. Not every data point perfectly fits the trend—far from it. Unless you are a novice, this will not keep you up at night. So the Christian can sleep well siding with the position with the fewest loose-ends, even if one or two are still dangling to the side when all is said and done.
There are some, however, who would quickly point out that a doctrine need only be taught in one place in scripture for it to be true everywhere else. “So what if only a verse or two support a true exception: If that’s what the verse says, then so be it.” While technically correct, those who mount this argument often neglect a more foundational principle of hermeneutics known as the analogia fidei, “the analogy of faith.” This rule states, in part, that isolated, controversial passages are to be interpreted in light of the numerous, non-controversial passages, and not the other way around:22
“The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.”23
Do you really want to run with a theory built on a couple possible exceptions to a rule, rather than one built on the rule itself? Surely that would be missing Sequoia National Forest for a few scraggly weeds.
No, when it comes to major, consequential life decisions, one should never bank on what amount to nothing more than dubious, highly contested loopholes. Instead, as Jesus said, build your life on bedrock, not quicksand (Matthew 7:24-27). You’ll never go wrong with a tried-and-true strategy like that.
Historical perspective
Martin Luther stated memorably that “History is like a drunk man on a horse: No sooner does he fall off on the left side, does he mount again and fall off on the right.” This saying is an apt description of the history of divorce and remarriage.
In the beginning there was neither divorce nor adultery (Genesis 1:26-31, 2:18-25). After the fall, however, wicked men wasted no time in multiplying wives unto themselves,24 shamelessly boasting of their rebellion (Genesis 4:19, 23, 24). The history of ancient man that followed was replete with divorce and remarriage for any cause, even among God’s people.25
All that changed when Jesus arrived on the scene. Jesus’, and later Paul’s teachings on marriage and singleness, divorce and remarriage, gave rise to three simultaneous marriage revolutions: 1) The widespread practice of marriage for life; 2) the stigmatization of divorce and remarriage; 3) the elevation of the value and dignity of singleness; and 4) the promotion of an almost unheard of relationship category: the separated, celibate married couple (1 Corinthians 7:10, 11). Paul’s instructions to the Corinthians epitomize the the early New Testament Church’s lofty standards for sexual conduct (Ephesians 5:3, emphasis mine):
“But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people.”
Unfortunately, the Early Church’s unprecedented commitment to chastity didn’t last forever. Christianity would eventually face plant onto the other side of the horse.
Whether through the lax and loose catalog of Protestant “divorce exceptions” or the farcical fraud of Catholic marriage annulments, for centuries now Christians have been treating the holy, lifelong marriage covenant with cavalier contempt. Today, our forbears’ attitudes on marriage and sex are dismissed as prudish, repressive, and even dangerous. Modern Christians attempting to recover something of their ancient heritage of sexual continence are sneered at as purveyors of a toxic “purity culture.”26
No wonder so many are now avoiding marriage altogether as a outdated cultural vestige of years gone by! Those that still choose to marry now find themselves in an institution that has been drug through the mud for so long that it is barely recognizable.
This explains why the apparently failed model of traditional marriage is being increasingly substituted for marriage involving two men or two women (“same-sex marriage”), transvestites (“trans marriage”), close relatives (incest), multiple partners (“polyamory”), minors (pedophilic marriage), and so forth. By denigrating marriage through divorce and adulterous remarriage, conservative Christians set the stage for just this sort of downward trajectory.
In two-thousand plus years of Church history, the pendulum has once again swung completely from one side to the other: The early Church, with its zeal for sexual separateness, has been supplanted by the modern Church and its “live and let live,” “anything goes” attitude (Judges 17:6). In the post-Christians west, sex is no longer viewed as a matter of public concern, enforced by shared, objective standards and serving the common interest, but rather as a purely atomistic, privatized “lifestyle choice” that is subject only to whim of the individual, even after that individual is married! This is not the first time this has happened historically, and it will likely not be the last (Ecclesiastes 1:9).
Like the men of Issachar, “who understood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chronicles 12:32), Christians today must come to grips with where the American Church now finds itself in the sweeping arch of history and its many cyclical subplots. Let’s restate the obvious: We are currently in a period of massive, precipitous cultural decline, as measured by virtually any parameter. If we fail to grasp this, we will continue to make tone deaf decisions in our churches, such as finally coming around to a more “tolerant” stance on divorce…at a time of rapid familial disintegration.
Any more of these costly blunders, and we too will be history.
Societal judgment
If we insist on upholding the lie that our divorces and subsequent adulteries are acceptable in God’s eyes, then God will spoil the ruse by serving us heaping helpings of the natural consequences of our “sanctified” sins. By giving us a taste of the fruits of our forbidden delights, God’s intent is to elicit in us a visceral response: “What’s this nasty aftertaste in my mouth and why is my stomach churning?” In other words “What’s with all these sickening societal trends?”
The Church is the last line of defense against evil in the world: As the Church goes, so goes the culture. So Christians of all people cannot afford to play around with sketchy, sinful, pagan practices. We have all but entirely lost our voice in the cultural conversation by doing just this. We have no say because we have no spine—we too have made a mess of our marriages, so who are we to talk (Leviticus 26:36–39; Proverbs 28:1)? This is partly correct, but it is certainly no excuse to remain mired in our silent compromise.
We have spent a good deal of time in this book face to face with the brutal realities of divorce and its individual, marital, familial, and societal fallouts.27 And yet, in spite of the raging fires all around us, many Christians maddeningly insist on maintaining that everything is fine.
But everything is not fine. The kids are not alright. And no one has been saying this more loudly and clearly than God Himself (Psalm 81:11-13):
“But My people did not listen to My voice; Israel would not submit to Me. So I gave them over to their stubborn hearts, to follow their own counsels. Oh, that My people would listen to Me, that Israel would walk in My ways!”
Unless the American Church has a radical “come-to-Jesus moment” on divorce and remarriage, and fast, then our society will continue on its merry way to hell, and we’ll have reserved for ourselves a front-row seat in the handbasket.
Exhortations to Christians
The following admonitions are applicable to Christians in general, but are intended for Christians leaders in particular, especially male leadership in the Church, but also parents and mature believers who serve as role models for others.
Wake up!
When it comes to divorce and remarriage, most Christian leaders are simply asleep at the wheel. We need a wake-up call from God’s Holy Spirit. The good news is, we don’t have to wait for one in the form of terrible, crushing judgment beyond anything we’ve seen up to this point. No, the wake-up call is already right there in scripture, where it’s been shouting to us from the rooftops all along (Ephesians 5:3–17, emphasis mine):
But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not become partners with them; for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret. But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible, for anything that becomes visible is light. Therefore it says,
‘Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.’”
As we have noted before, the sin of adultery, when disguised in the apparent legitimacy of a “monogamous” remarriage, can fly under the radar of even the most discerning Christian.28 When such unlawful remarriages began proliferating among God’s people, we started to forget why our spiritual ancestors were so worked up over them in the first place. As Augustine once warned his people:29
"Woe to the sins of men! We shrink from them only when we are not accustomed to them. As for those sins to which we are accustomed—although the blood of the Son of God was shed to wash them away—although they are so great that the Kingdom of God is wholly closed to them, yet, living with them often we come to tolerate them, and, tolerating them, we even practice some of them! But grant, O Lord, that we do not practice any of them which we could prohibit!"
We cannot allow ourselves to be lulled to sleep when it comes to sins as serious as divorce and adultery, both of which do unspeakable violence to the work of Christ displayed on the cross (Hebrews 6:1–8, 10:26–31) and in each of our marriages (Ephesians 5:21–33).
Wake up, believer!
Fess up!
Part of the normal Christian experience is realizing that you are in the wrong on something that you used to think was fine. For example, perhaps you used to give yourself a pass on saying certain words, viewing or listening to certain content, or engaging in certain behaviors that you now look back on with horror. At first, you started to sense that something was slightly amiss. Guilty misgivings kept cropping up and eventually there came a point of no return where you admitted “Ok, that’s enough of that. No more. This is unbefitting of a child of God.” That, in a nutshell, is the meaning of the word “repent” (μετανοέω, “metanoeó”): a life-changing change of mind.
Repentance, then, is a feature, not a bug of the Christian life. Indeed, not only repentance, but also faith, obedience, and confession are defining attributes of the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5–7; 1 John 1:5-10; etc.), not mere shibboleths for gaining admission (Judges 12:5, 6).
When it comes to the sin of adultery, we dare not soft-pedal the seriousness of the offense and the necessity of repentance for all who find themselves entangled in it. The sixth commandment is “thou shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14). Out of the incalculably vast number of pronouncements God could have made, He issued only ten commandments, and this was one of them. God literally wrote this law in stone as a memorial for all time (Exodus 31:18, 32:15, 16). Translation: Adultery is a really big deal to God.
Indeed, God imposed the severest of all penalties on those who committed adultery: death. Yes, like other grievous sins such as murder (Exodus 21:12; Leviticus 24:17; Numbers 35:30-31), adultery was a death penalty offense under Old Covenant law (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22). Although capital punishment is never enjoined on New Covenant believers as a means of church discipline, it is imperative that Church leaders emphasize the deadly fallouts of divorce and remarriage as deterrents against them. Because make no mistake about it: Adultery still leads to death, just as surely as it did under the law of Moses.30
And don’t think you’re clear of adultery just because your squeaky clean family is featured on the main page of your church’s website. Jesus warned His disciples to “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy” (Luke 12:1b, emphasis mine; cf. Matthew 16:5-12, Mark 8:14-21). Both in their words (Matthew 16:12) and deeds (Matthew 23:3), the Pharisees lead their followers astray (Matthew 15:14, 23:13, 15). While maintaining a spiffy public persona, they were corrupt through and through (Matthew 23:25-28).
In fact, the religious leaders of Jesus’ day had so compromised true godliness that Jesus referred to them as “A wicked and adulterous generation” (Matthew 12:39a; Matthew 16:4)—and no wonder, for many were undoubtedly divorced and unlawfully remarried themselves! Ultimately, the Pharisees were no different than the false prophets and teachers that the Apostle Peter warned against (2 Peter 2:14a): “They have eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin. They entice unsteady souls.” Although the Pharisees viewed themselves as morally superior to your average, uncouth adulterer (Luke 18:11), they were not (Matthew 5:28, 31, 19:9, 23:1-36; Mark 10:2-10).
Indeed, the faux religious veneer that masked their fornication made it all the more detestable to God, who despises religious pretension (Isaiah 1:11–15; Jeremiah 6:20; Amos 5:21–23). In Jesus’ words, we must “watch out!” (Matthew 16:6; Mark 8:15; Luke 12:1) for such hypocrisy, which is as defiling as it is deceptive.
Let’s not forget that none of us has it all together—all have sinned, all have come up short (Romans 3:23). “There is no one righteous, not even one” (Romans 3:10b; cf. Psalm 14:1–3, 53:1–3). The reality is, in this fallen world, faithful men are rare (Proverbs 20:6) and faithful women, if anything, are even rarer (Proverbs 31:10; Ecclesiastes 7:28). Adultery is the default, factory setting of the human heart. If we pretend otherwise, we fool no one, least of all God. But if we fess up and admit this self-evident truth, then, amazingly, there is mercy for us yet (Proverbs 28:13): “Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy.”
Man up!
Pastors can no longer pussyfoot around the issues of divorce and remarriage for fear of offending their (overly) sensitive people. It’s no mystery as to why they would opt for such a tact, as their pews are undoubtedly filled with countless divorcees and unlawfully remarried couples. Many of them, upon hearing the teachings espoused here in a Sunday sermon, will almost certainly hightail it to a more “understanding” church (John 6:66; 2 Timothy 4:3). The offering plates will soon dry up, the pastor will be called to account by the elder board, and both his livelihood and reputation will be put at stake in the process.
In light of these fears, we must remind ourselves of scripture’s warning that cowards will not inherit the kingdom of heaven, but rather “will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur” (Revelation 21:8). God’s words, not ours.
So, Christians, no more putting up with weak-willed pastors in your pulpits. If your pastor or elders refuse to confront divorce and remarriage head on, then warn them once, or at most twice, and then have nothing to do with them (Titus 3:10). If you as a Church leader are either unwilling or unable to hold the line on these issues and instead cave to the peoples’ every demand (Exodus 32:21-24), then frankly, you need to find another line of work. Your fecklessness has done enough damage to the Church already. Either “quit you like men,” or quit (1 Corinthians 16:13).31
Effeminate empathy is destroying us. Weakness is ruining us. “Kindness” is killing us. It’s time to man up, or shut up.
Speak up!
There’s an old saying that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Church leaders must regularly and prophylactically teach their people what the Bible says concerning divorce and remarriage so that they can avoid contracting these diseases in the first place!
Christian leaders become entangled in the sins of their people if they refuse to intentionally speak out against them, or worse, grant explicit license for them. Like the driver of a getaway car at the scene of a crime, such leaders are accomplices in the criminal activity of their people (Luke 17:1, 2):
“And He said to His disciples, ‘Temptations to sin are sure to come, but woe to the one through whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin.’”
We have to warn one another of the dangers of the deadly sins of divorce and unlawful remarriage! If not, God will hold us accountable for the consequences of facilitating them (Ezekiel 3:16–19):
“At the end of seven days the word of the Lord came to me: ‘Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the people of Israel; so hear the word I speak and give them warning from Me. When I say to a wicked person, ‘You will surely die,’ and you do not warn them or speak out to dissuade them from their evil ways in order to save their life, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. But if you do warn the wicked person and they do not turn from their wickedness or from their evil ways, they will die for their sin; but you will have saved yourself.”
Churches across the world have for some decades now been bending to the prevailing cultural winds of no-fault divorce. Biblical and theological debates on the topic have reached stalemates, with many commentators simply retreating to their denomination’s pat answers.32 Many despair of ever reaching a consensus. “Why even try? Better just to leave the topic be than to step on one another’s toes unnecessarily.”
Rubbish! What could be more necessary than having these discussions at a time when divorce and adultery are not only running rampant, but the Church is by and large only further accommodating them? How can we repent and start afresh from first principles if we remain quiet in the face of these grave challenges?
Now more than ever, Christians of conscience have to speak up and call this sort of approach out for what it is: a suicidal silence.
Look up!
Although we are creatures made from dirt, “earthlings” in the truest sense (Genesis 2:7; Psalm 103:14), we were also made for heaven. We are to set our minds on it (Colossians 3:2) and, one day, dwell in it (Revelation 21:1-4).
Marriage is the earthly analogy for the heavenly reality of the union of Christ the bridegroom with His bride-Church, which will be consummated at the end of time in a unified new heaven and new earth (Revelation 21). As staggering as these truths are, it’s easy to lose sight of them in the hoi polloi of fallen humanity and the boastful machinations of the fading powers of this age (1 Corinthians 2:6). Indeed, it is perhaps because these truths are so far beyond our comprehension that they simply glance off our foreheads without leaving so much as a mark—we’re too earthly-minded to be of any heavenly good.
As discussed in chapter VII “Be Reconciled to God,” God's ways are higher, nobler, and altogether better than man's (Isaiah 55:6–9). Our small, selfish little minds can barley conceive of what simply comes naturally to the mind of God.
When it comes to dealing to the grievous sins that married couples often commit against one another, it never even dawned on the fallen human heart that there was any other option besides divorce. How little we resemble our Maker, who never leaves or forsakes us (Hebrews 13:5), who never forgot His covenant with His faithless bride Israel (Isaiah 49:14, 15; Ezekiel 16), and who always remains faithful to His vows, even when we are unfaithful to ours (2 Timothy 2:13). In demanding divorce for individuals whom God has united for life, we are asking nothing less than for God to deny Himself, something He simply cannot and will not do.
Church leaders stand no chance of persuading their people to believe, much less obey the Bible’s teachings on divorce and remarriage unless they constantly redirect their gaze to heaven. Otherwise, they will miss the whole point of the Bible’s instructions on marriage. They will groan under an unbearable burden (Genesis 4:13; Matthew 23:4, 25:24; Hebrews 12:20), rather than finding rest under the easy yoke of Christ (Matthew 11:29-30; 1 John 5:3). The Lord is not in the business of making stoics, Gnostics, or masochists out of His followers. Far from it. He endured the shameful cross He bore for the joy set before Him (Hebrews 12:2), the joy of being together again with His father, and with all His people, in heaven (Matthew 25:21, 23; John 6:39, 17:24).
Compared with the joys to come, what loss can we incur here and now that will outweigh what we will gain in eternity (2 Corinthians 4:17–18)? Counting the cost of following Christ is only productive if your heart is set on treasures in heaven, rather than earth (Matthew 6:19–21; Luke 14:25–33). Hear the attitude of the Apostle Paul, who was in prison when he composed these words (Philippians 1:21-24):
“For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell. I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better. But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account.”
If we can but begin to repeat these words with a fraction of the conviction with which Paul uttered them, then we will have gained great ground in our lives and times.
Christian, look up and behold your God! He is in heaven, and you are on earth; therefore, let your words be few (Ecclesiastes 5:2b).
God looks down from heaven on us divorcees and adulterers and says: Return to Me, your first love (Revelation 2:4, 5) and one true Husband (2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 22:17) and I will cleanse you of your sins, forgive your rebellion, and restore to you the joy of the virgin bride with her bridegroom (Jeremiah 33:8, 11; John 3:29).
If God is the love of our life, then why wouldn’t we run headlong to Him at His every beck and call? If the Spirit and the Bride say “Come!” (Revelation 22:17), then how can we possibly refuse?
Remember, “The Lord our God is merciful and forgiving, even though we have rebelled against Him” (Daniel 9:9). He will restore His people Israel to their rightful place at His side, though for now they are mostly estranged (Romans 11:25-32). He will remember His covenant with Abraham, though He never truly forgot it (Isaiah 62:4):
“Never again will you be called ‘The Forsaken City’ or ‘The Desolate Land.’ Your new name will be ‘The City of God’s Delight’ and ‘The Bride of God,’ for the LORD delights in you and will claim you as His bride.”
What a God we serve!
Unless we lose ourselves in worship, beholding our Lord and becoming more like Him as we do (2 Corinthians 3:18), we will remain bogged down in the quagmires of our offenses, lame excuses, and self-serving narratives (Psalm 103:1–5):
“Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all that is within me, bless His holy name! Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all His benefits, who forgives all your iniquity, who heals all your diseases, who redeems your life from the pit, who crowns you with steadfast love and mercy, who satisfies you with good so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's.”
Now what was it you were saying a minute or two ago about your horrible ex who done done you wrong? In light of who our God is and what He has done for us, frankly, who cares?
As great as our grievances may be, our God is greater. His perfection puts our self-righteousness to shame. Our excuses pale in comparison to His promises. “Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, bringing holiness to completion in the fear of God” (2 Corinthians 7:1).
Rise up!
When leaders set bad precedent for their people on divorce and remarriage, it creates a sinful snowball effect, bowling over generations of unsuspecting victims (Exodus 34:7b). As the saying goes, if we “given an inch” on divorce and remarriage “they’ll take a mile.”
On the topic of marriage, Church leaders must go out of their way to raise the bar both for themselves and for those under their care. This is exactly what Jesus did with the issue of divorce in the Sermon on the Mount, saying in effect that the shoddy, subpar standards they’d been sold simple weren’t up to snuff. The kingdom of heaven was at hand. It was a new day.
This is why it is so disappointing to hear respected evangelical leaders argue that since remarriage after divorce was a given in ancient Jewish and Roman culture, then the same should apply to Christians under the New Covenant. Hellooo! That’s the entire premise that Jesus and Paul sought to upend with their teachings! Can you imagine Jesus saying: “You have heard it said on divorce…But I say unto you, you can pretty much stick with that, since it seems to be what everyone else is going with these days.”33
Come on Christians! How could anyone possibly fall for that?
We have to emphasize the newness of the New Covenant, ratified in Jesus’s blood (Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20). Jesus’ “Do not divorce; do not remarry”34 stance represents the high watermark of holy standards for marriage the world over. No one ever held a higher view of marriage, because no one ever grasped the weightiness of “holy matrimony,” and the holy God it represented, better than Jesus.
The new wine of Jesus' teaching on divorce and remarriage will burst the old-wineskin of “no-fault” divorce as practiced today by Christians and non-Christians alike. Like righteousness and unrighteousness, light and darkness, these approaches can have no fellowship with one another (2 Corinthians 6:14). No sooner could Christ be united to a whore than could members of His body remarry during the lifetime of their previous spouse with God's blessing (1 Corinthians 6:15). God forbid! No, God has shown us a more excellent way in His son (1 Corinthians 12:31, 13:1–13).
Indeed, it is an indictment of the highest order that Christians ever countenanced the possibility of divorce post-Calvary: “But God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). Christ didn’t die for a perfect bride; He died to perfect a sinful one (Ephesians 1:4, 5:25-27; Colossians 1:22).
I’m sorry pro-divorce Christian, but that is a complete game-changer. We can never go back to living a petty, tit-for-tat, merely human existence, treating others in ways that seems “fair” to the carnal, unregenerate mind. Jesus forever shattered that mold, setting the bar as high as it could possibly be set: “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48).
Divorce isn’t good enough for the follower of Christ: “If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them” (Luke 6:32). As Christians, we must love even those who will never give us the time of day, because that's what God does every day (Matthew 5:43-47; Luke 6:35, 36). If that’s the case, then how much more should we love our covenant spouses, even those who neither acknowledge nor reciprocate our love for them?
Modern Christians fall embarrassingly short of incorporating these radical teachings into their marriages. Given that divorce is now an almost ubiquitous element of American Church culture, pastors, like Christ before them, must set the record straight for their people on this extremely misunderstood topic.35 Although divorce begins in the heart, it quickly takes refuge in strongholds of the mind. Prophets, pastors, and teachers alike must confront these spiritual and ideological barriers, and tear them down brick by brick (2 Corinthians 10:4, 5):
“The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.”
Now that’s what we’re talkin’ about.
Moreover, in appointing Church elders and overseers, we have to keep in mind Paul’s high standards for these positions (1 Timothy 3:2, emphasis mine): “Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach […].”36 We would like to propose a bold, long overdue, and we believe Biblically justified criterion for Christians to gauge the trustworthiness of their church’s leadership: If your pastor is divorced and/or unlawfully married or remarried, either once or multiple times over, then kindly bid him farewell and wave politely to your fellow congregants from your vehicle as you and your family carefully, but deliberately exit the premises and find your way to another church.
If a pastor or elder doesn’t have the spiritual discernment to spot the adultery right under his own nose, what hope do his people have of avoiding a similar fate? To sit under the counsel of such unqualified men, week in and week out, is a recipe for spiritual trouble if ever there was one (Psalm 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:19). And we aren’t having any more of it. Nope, not us. Sorry. Love you. There’s a place in God’s Church for you if you repent, but if not, then buh-bye, thanks, but no thanks, movin’ on.
The Bible’s grand plan for marriage is not going to work for you or your church if your goal is to just barely squeeze through the pearly gates at the last second. If your aim in the Christian life is to merely pass the course with a D-minus, then you’re just not going to hack it in a Biblical marriage. Paul, for one, aimed to win the race and receive the prize (1 Corinthians 9:24-27; Philippians 3:12-21), and that’s just what he achieved (2 Timothy 4:7, 8), by God’s grace (1 Corinthians 15:10). The pastor’s aim should be nothing less than to absolutely ruin his people for anything less than God’s best for their marriages.
Rise up people of God! Our God is a jealous God, an all-consuming fire (Exodus 20:5, 34:14; Joshua 24:19; Deuteronomy 4:24; Hebrews 12:29). Let this one grand objective consume both you and all that you undertake in your various ministerial endeavors (2 Corinthians 11:2, emphasis mine): “For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.”
Parting shots at “divorce exceptions”
Because we just couldn’t help ourselves, here, in no particular order, are our final, parting shots at one of our favorite targets in this book: the infamous “divorce exceptions.” We’ve also sprinkled in a few related bits of proverbial advice here and there that we hope you’ll find helpful.
Christians who embrace the legal charade of “divorce exceptions” are practicing no-fault divorce alright: If it’s not your fault, you can divorce!
To co-opt a saying from Jesus, “You shall know a doctrine by its fruits” (Matthew 7:16, 20). When it comes to “divorce exceptions,” the fruits are all rotten—people need only smell their foul stench and see their teeming maggots to cringe at the thought of tasting them.
“Divorce exceptions” are riddled with inconsistencies, leading many to conclude (and rightly so, if their premises be granted) that the Bible flat out contradicts itself on marriage, divorce, and sex.37 Why add more fuel to their fire by embracing these supposed sidesteps?
Are there exceptions to any other sin? For example, are there circumstances under which murder is OK? How about rape? Theft? If not, then why is adultery the one exception? Or do you grant many “exceptions”?
Let’s start calling “divorce exceptions” “adultery exceptions” since, ordinarily, divorce and remarriage during the lifetime of one’s former, lawfully-wed spouse is adultery (Matthew 5:32, 19:9; Mark 10:11, 12; Luke 16:18; Romans 7:1-3; 1 Corinthians 7:39). It may not be a smart PR move, but it would be more accurate.
“Divorce exceptions” are a deceptive mixture of flesh and Spirit (Romans 8:1-17). Remember the words of Jesus (John 6:63): “The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life.”
How does adultery make remarriage during the lifetime of one’s former spouse, which is also adultery, somehow acceptable? They are fundamentally the same thing: enjoying married life with someone besides your living, one-flesh marriage partner. Adding a sin like adultery in between these unions makes no material difference whatsoever.
If divorce and adulterous remarriage are sometimes sanctioned by God, then why do they have so much residual guilt and regret associated with them? Godly repentance and the obedience that follows may be extremely difficult, but they bring cleansing and confidence before God (Hebrews 10:22; 1 John 3:21, 22) and leave behind no trace of regret (2 Corinthians 7:10).
You have to confess adultery. And not just to God, but to those you have sinned against: “Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed” (James 5:16a). If you keep it between yourself and God only, you will never prosper, you will never find cleansing, you will never be truly set free (Proverbs 28:13; John 8:36; 1 John 1:5–10).
Sin tears apart; love binds together. Sin destroys; love heals. Sin commits violence; love brings wholeness. Divorce is sin; reconciliation is love.
What about the salvation and/or restoration of the guilty party? If he or she repents, will you, as the innocent party, stand at the ready to forgive and take him or her back? If not, then perhaps you’re not as “innocent” as you appear: “But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins” (Matthew 6:15).
We cannot forget to stick up for the guilty party. Why does he or she just get thrown under the bus? Are they chopped liver? Doesn’t God care about them too? Aren’t we are all guilty parties in one respect or another? “Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you” (Ephesians 4:32).
Is there divorce in heaven? “Of course not,” you will say. So then, pro-divorce Christian, please stop praying the following portion of Lord's prayer until you really mean it (Matthew 6:10): “Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”
Rather than asking “What would the immortal, infinitely holy God of the universe (who dwells in light unapproachable and whom no one has ever seen or possibly can see) think about this doctrine?” (1 Timothy 6:16) we tend to just reflexively side with what seems to be the most “reasonable” stance according to your average, Joe Blow American Christian: “Now that I can buy into. That I can get on board with.” We make the mistake of thinking God is just like us, when He is most certainly not (Psalm 50:21; Luke 16:15)!
We can buy into “divorce exceptions,” but we’re stuck on one minor point: How do you lessen the holiness of God? Explain that and we’re on board.
“Divorce exceptions” are really just provisions for the flesh masquerading as legitimate legal outs (Romans 13:14; cf. Ephesians 4:17-32, Colossians 3:1-17): “But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.”
“Divorce exceptions” are a hopeless morass of contradictions. If adultery, abandonment, and abuse dissolve the marriage bond, then aren’t these sins the actual causes of divorce, rather mere grounds for it?38 Do couples that have suffered such sins have to remarry should they decide to stay together?
“Divorce exceptions” lead, ultimately, to exceptions on everything else that Christ taught. For those who accept “exceptions,” every other teaching of scripture is made to cater to them, even though they are not explicitly, or even implicitly found in the text. Indeed, even if they are explicitly denied, there they are in the midst. Every other knee must bow to this one overarching, overruling principle. And thus, the rule of the “exceptions” usurps the rule of Christ.
Even though divorce and remarriage during a former spouse’s lifetime are clearly and repeatedly ruled out as sins in scripture, still we are told, with a wink and a nod, that “divorce exceptions” are exceptions, after all. Unbelievable. I guess all things are possible for those who must leave.
Far from saying that one could divorce for adultery, in the “exception clauses,” Jesus was restating, for the record, that one could not divorce for adultery, the precise opposite of how most in the modern Church have understood Him.
If adultery renders your spouse “as good as dead,” as the Westminster Confession of Faith infamously states,39 then why are you still required to support him or her by law subsequent to divorce in many cases? Why, indeed, do you have to have any continued dealings with him or her after divorcing? That doesn’t sound “as good as dead” to me. Divorce, then, is false advertising, the old “bait and switch.” It’s an illusion, a mirage, a myth, a rumor. It is never a clean break. It is a false god; it never delivers on its promises.
To those who hold to “divorce exceptions,” we offer the following modest proposal: To formally incorporate your beliefs into your Church’s liturgical traditions, please list all the “exceptions” that you and your soon-to-be partner accept right up front, for all your witnesses to hear and confirm. For instance, from henceforth, amend your marriage vows from “Till death do us part” to “Till death, or adultery, or abandonment, or abuse of any kind, or neglect, or pornography, etc. […] do us part.” Also, consider changing the phrase “so long as we both shall live” to “so long as we both do not violate the covenant,” and shortening “for better or worse” to simply “for better.” Yes, this would put somewhat of a damper on your big day, but it would help the rest of us understand just what exactly the two of you are signing up for.
How many contracts do we sign without first reading the fine print? Many, and usually without giving it so much as a second thought. This is what modern Christians are doing with marriage: They say the traditional marriage vows, but each of them has an enormous asterisk next to it with endless stipulations attached in the fine print that most of us do not even bother to read. Consequently, the vows ring hollow. God states His rules for marriage concisely and up front, without any fine print. No loopholes, no funny business, and no “exception clauses.”
A final call to arms
Most American Christians have made peace with divorce and unlawful remarriage. Many say that they’re here to stay, and so we might as well get used to them.
Not us.
We refuse to lay down arms until divorce and adultery are finally and forever cast into the lake of fire. In this fallen, war-torn world, we simply do not have the luxury as the Church militant to call for a ceasefire while the battle rages around us. Christians are no longer treating marriage as a sacred, holy institution, and the culture has followed our lead. If we all just waive the white flag, surrender, and move on, things will only get worse—much, much worse.
It wasn’t always this way. In the not so distant past, divorce was rare, especially among the religious. Not so for today’s Christian. Currently, evangelicals divorce more frequently than any other religious group in America, including more than twice as often as Hindus, who have the lowest divorce rates of any religion.40 I don’t care who you are or what your position is on these topics, that is pathetic. What a scandalous reproach divorce among Christians is to the name of Christ! If there is even an ounce of truth to these damning statistics then we are in BIG trouble as a people and as a nation.
If this sort of trend doesn’t wake us up, what will? What’s it going to take to get us to finally straighten up and fly right? When will we stop making flimsy excuses for our dirty little habits? What do we have to see come down the pike for us to finally change our ways?
How about a mainstream evangelical megachurch pastor accepting divorce, adulterous remarriage, and sodomy, but drawing the line if the sodomy occurs prior to the finalization of a divorce from a previous heterosexual marriage, since that would just be flat-out, good old-fashioned adultery?41
How about the rising trend of so-called “gray divorce” among baby boomers, whereby couples are calling it quits even after decades of marriage?42
How about the misleading decline in divorce rates over the past decade…due to declining marriage rates and the rise of co-habitation?43
We don’t know about you, but that’s plenty for us.
In our opinion, the body count racked up by divorce and adulterous remarriage in our day is already more than enough to convince the reasonable observer of the need to push back against these practices. The casualties these sin have caused are so many, and the damage to our families, nation, and God’s reputation so staggering, that it is impossible to digest. When you reach that point, it’s not long before the land vomits you out altogether (Leviticus 18:25, 28, 20:22).
Divorce and adultery are not harmless, individual sins: “Please respect our family’s privacy as we work through this difficult, deeply personal situation.” Sorry, but your divorce is our business too, especially if you claim to be a Christian. We are all impacted by your choices. Think about it. David’s adultery destabilized his entire kingdom (2 Samuel 12). Solomon’s unlawful marriages brought down the whole nation of Israel (1 Kings 11; Nehemiah 13:23-27). John the Baptist’s stand against unlawful remarriage cost him his life (Matthew 14:1-12). And it’s not a stretch to say that these issues lie at the heart of why Jesus gave His life (Matthew 12:39a, 16:4; John 7:7).
We cannot not sit idly by and allow our marriages, families, churches, communities, and country to be ripped apart at the seams by divorce. We cannot allow what we consider to be good to be spoken of as evil (Romans 14:16). We’ve got a fight on our hands, and it’s no time to back down.
We are by no means the only ones enlisting in this fight: A small but growing contingent of evangelical scholars, pastors, and lay leaders have been sounding the alarm on divorce and remarriage for some decades now in scholarly journals, books, articles, and sermons.44 We here at the League of Believers are taking our stand with these Christians, adding our small voice to the growing chorus.
We trust that many others like us will be driven to reexamine the scriptures by the excesses of modern divorce culture. We pray that by the leading of the Holy Spirit, and with the help of resources like this book, these believers will also rediscover the ancient view of divorce and remarriage propounded in the scriptures and practiced by the Fathers. Divorce-permissive Christians, consider yourselves officially on notice—it is you who should be on the defense, not us.
If there was ever a time to repent and do the hard, but necessary thing, it's now. We must defend our God, our wives, our children, and our communities, no matter the cost. We must fight the good fight of faith (1 Timothy 6:12a).
Consider this our declaration of war.
Postscript: Happily ever after?
“My ex and I are best friends now.”
“The divorce was tough, but the kids have been so resilient.”
“I chose wrong the first time, but God finally lead me to the right one.”
The lies we tell ourselves.
Be honest, divorced and unlawfully remarried Christian: Are things really as neat and tidy as you present them? Are you and your former spouse really getting along swimmingly now? Are you not plagued with regret? Has your divorce and remarriage borne good fruit in your family as a whole? If you could see the generational domino effect of your divorce and adultery, the deprivation they will produce and the good they will prevent, would you do it all over again?
The standard baggage that comes with the sins of divorce and adulterous remarriage are not the inheritance of the child of God. Only Christ can cleanse us from a guilty conscience (Hebrews 9:14) and set us free indeed (John 8:31-36). But He cannot do these things for you so long as you cling to your sin (Romans 13:12; Ephesians 4:22; Hebrews 12:1). It is sheer folly to ask for forgiveness for a sin that you are choosing to remain in. No sin has to define you, but you must turn from it.
Obedience may be costly, but disobedience is far costlier.
“Quod Deus coniunxit, homo non separet.”
“Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”
—Matthew 19:6 and Mark 10:9
How it all started
We’ve shared the backstory to the League of Believers (see our “About” page and “How Did We Get Here?”). But how did we first get on the subject of divorce and remarriage? In the next post we will share a brief preface to set up the contents of this eBook, including our motivation behind taking on this controversial topic. Stay tuned for the complete eBook shortly thereafter.
Thanks for reading the League of Believers.
We are committed to offering this newsletter in its entirety completely free of cost. If you have not yet subscribed, you can support this free newsletter by becoming a subscriber using the button below.
You can also support this ministry by sharing this newsletter with friends or family that may profit from it.
As always, we would love to hear your feedback, including prayer requests, in the comments section below or through emails to:
garrettpleague@proton.me
Want to print this article or read it on your e-reader device? We’ve got you covered. Click the “Download” button below for an easy-to-print, downloadable PDF file containing this edition of the newsletter.
To illustrate this point, see the various views outlined in Bruce Vawter, “The Divorce Clauses in Mt 5,32 and 19,9.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 1954; 16(2): 155–167.
See footnote 27 in chapter V “The Christian Caught in Adultery.”
See chapter II “The Lord of Marriage.”
For a helpful, brief critique of situational ethics from a Christian perspective, see “Situational Ethics,” Tabletalk, 2016.
For example, the Bible directly forbids transvestitism (Deuteronomy 22:5), and so we have direct precedent in the form of an explicit commandment forbidding this behavior. Thus, even though the Bible says nothing directly about, say, puberty-blocking medications or modern so-called “gender transition surgery,” since it does condemn changing one’s outward garb to resemble the opposite sex, we can reasonably infer that the far more drastic action of permanently changing one’s sexual organs and/or other physical attributes to resemble the opposite sex are most certainly also condemned, if anything to an even greater degree than transvestitism per se.
All too often, pastors say things like the following from Kevin DeYoung’s “A Sermon on Divorce and Remarriage” (University Reformed Church, 2010; emphasis mine): “[…] the phrase ‘is not enslaved’ in 1 Corinthians 7:15 probably implies that the spouse who has been deserted is free to marry.” “Probably implies”? So, it’s probably OK to leave your spouse and remarry another if he or she deserts you? That would probably not constitute adultery? When it comes to a deadly serious, premeditated sin like adultery, “probably” isn’t good enough.
After listing obvious “works of the flesh,” including “sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality” (Galatians 5:19), Paul states that the fruit of the Spirit are (Galatians 5:22, 23, emphasis mine): “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.” Now that’s the sort of “above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2) approach we need to take in the Church, abstaining from even the appearance of evil (1 Thessalonians 5:22), rather than toying with actions that are “probably” not sin.
Given this ambiguity, does this pastor advise his people against remarrying after desertion, to avoid the possibility of adultery? Not at all (DeYoung, “A Sermon on Divorce and Remarriage”): “Divorce is permitted, but not required, on the ground of desertion by an unbelieving spouse” and “In situations where the divorce was permissible, remarriage is also permissible.” The time is long past for Christians to reject such reckless counsel.
To help illustrate this point, it is common among pro-life advocates to argue that if one is unsure whether a developing fetus is a human being or not, one should assume that it is to avoid the possibility of murder. Likewise, if a hunter thinks he has spotted a trophy buck, but is unsure whether it is his camouflaged hunting partner instead, or if a demolition crew is about to detonate a series of explosives that will implode a building, but is uncertain whether the building has been fully evacuated, then you don’t pull the trigger, you don’t hit the detonation button.
If that is the case with respect to murder, and there is even a hint of a possibility that we may inadvertently leading our people into adultery, a similarly deadly offense in scripture (Exodus 20:13, 14, 21:12; Leviticus 20:10, 24:17; Numbers 35:30-31; Deuteronomy 22:22), then why on earth would any Church leader ever permit remarriage during the lifetime of one’s former spouse? Worse still, given the substantial biblical and historical arguments in favor of the various “no divorce” and/or “no remarriage” positions, why would any Christian denomination take the further step of adopting a formal ecclesiastical policy permitting possible, if not probable adultery? Such leaders and institutions are without excuse.
While one’s separated spouse is living, of course.
That is, married, but living apart from one’s spouse.
See, for example, Justin Taylor (citing John Piper’s arguments) in “3 Reasons Those Who Are Unbiblically Remarried After a Divorce Should Not Leave Their New Spouse,” from The Gospel Coalition. We have responded to these arguments in detail in chapters V and VII.
See objection 6. in chapter V “The Christian Caught in Adultery.”
For example, since 2002, the Church of England has adopted a compromise whereby it gives local vicars the freedom to decide whether or not to officiate marriages between divorcees whose former spouses are living. If they decide not to, the church will still perform a ceremony of dedication, thanksgiving, and blessing after these civil unions have been legally formed outside the church. See “Marriage after divorce” from the Church of England’s official website, as well as the Church’s official explanatory statement Marriage in church after divorce.
For a brief historical synopsis of how the Church of England compromised its policy opposing divorce and unlawful remarriage over the centuries, see “How the Church of England has shifted on divorce, from Henry VIII to Meghan Markle” by William Booth and Karla Adam of The Washington Post.
Given its policy on adulterous remarriages, it should comes as no surprise that the Church of England recently adopted the same policy for gay marriages. See “Church of England backs plans to bless gay couples” by Harry Farley of BBC News. This same pattern of capitulation is well underway in America churches as well.
See p. 16, 17, William Heth, “Jesus on Divorce: How My Mind Has Changed.” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology. 2002; 6(1): 4–29.
Our approach to making sense of the Greek of Matthew’s “exception clauses” is most indebted to Leslie McFall’s translational strategy, but he is by no means the only person to suggest such an approach. For example, Andrew Kulikovsky, taking a cue from Augustine’s preteritive view (as articulated in Vawter, “The Divorce Clauses in Mt 5,32 and 19,9.”), proposes that the “exception clauses” of Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 are best understood as parenthetical asides intended to explicitly prohibit divorce for sexual sin (p. 7, “Divorce and Remarriage: Another look at the Matthean ‘exception’ clauses,” Wynn Vale, South Australia: 2005). Thus, he would render, for example, Matthew 19:9 as follows (p. 7, 8, ibid., emphasis mine):
“I tell you that any man who divorces his wife, (he may not divorce for sexual sin/divorce on the basis of sexual sin is not allowed), and marries another woman commits adultery.”
This approach has much to commend it and is perfectly in line with the one we have adopted here (see especially chapters II and III).
See “General Information” section of Leslie’s personal website.
That is, the science of interpreting the Bible.
On the Incarnation of the Word, Chapter IX: Conclusion, 57.
See John Zmirak’s hilarious piece “Christ Didn’t Call Us to Be Too Dumb to Live,” from The Stream.
William of Ockham (1287–1347) was Catholic theologian and friar of the Franciscan order. For a fittingly concise explanation of his eponymous logical principle, see “What is Occam's Razor?” from Conceptually.
See, for example, Gordon Wenham’s critique of a position similar to our own on p. 56, 57 of Jesus, Divorce, and Remarriage: In Their Historical Setting (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019). While we would agree with Wenham that remarriage during the lifetime of one’s divorced spouse is never permissible, we would disagree with his critique on this point, as well as his defense of an exception for divorce over sexual immorality from Christ’s teachings.
Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter I “Of the Holy Scripture,” section IX.
As Robert Shaw states in his exposition of this portion of the confession: “Some things that are briefly and obscurely handled in one place, are more fully and clearly explained in other places; and, therefore, when we would find out the true sense of Scripture, we must compare one passage with another, that they may illustrate one another; and we must never affix a sense to any particular text but such as is agreeable to ‘the analogy of faith,’ or the general scheme of divine truth.”
Polygamy involves marriage to more than one partner simultaneously, which the Bible condemns as a sinful departure from creation norms (Genesis 1:26–28, 31, 2:18–25; Deuteronomy 17:17; cf. Matthew 19:5, Mark 10:7–8, 1 Corinthians 6:16, Ephesians 5:31, and 1 Timothy 3:2) that constitutes the sin of adultery (Matthew 19:4–9; Mark 10:5–12; Romans 7:1–3; 1 Corinthians 7:39). The practice of having multiple successive, monogamous, adulterous remarriages has been termed by David Pawson “consecutive polygamy” in contrast to more traditional forms of “simultaneous polygamy.”
See chs. 1–3, Wenham, Jesus, Divorce, and Remarriage: In Their Historical Setting.
The adolescence of this allegation is, perhaps unsurprisingly, largely lost on those who levy it. In truth, it is only a step or two above the classic “Eww, Billy’s got cooties!” response of grade-schoolers. Sadly, many Christians have fallen for this tactic and have rejected Biblical chastity altogether. One prominent example includes the now apostate former evangelical megachurch pastor Joshua Harris, who once championed sexual purity but now glories in the shame of sexual impurity, including divorce and the LGBTQ etc. agenda (see “Joshua Harris, a former pastor who wrote relationship book, says his marriage is over and he is no longer Christian” by Rob Picheta of CNN).
See chapter VI “Divorced From Reality.”
See “The divorce delusion” in chapter VI “Divorced From Reality.”
See p. 54, Handbook on Faith, Hope, and Love, chapter XXI, “Problems of Casuistry.”
See “The stench of death” in chapter VI “Divorced From Reality.”
It’s hard to top the King James translation of 1 Corinthians 16:13 (emphasis mine), “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong,” but the Douay-Rheims Bible may come close (emphasis mine): “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, do manfully, and be strengthened.”
David Field, “Talking Points: The divorce debate—where are we now?” Themelios. 1983; 8(3): 26–31.
This might sound like hyperbole, but on the issue of divorce and remarriage, most evangelical scholars would place Jesus’ standard on par with, and in the final analysis far below (if you interpret Jesus’ sole “exception” as a mere principle establishing many others) the standard of the stricter school of thought (the so-called “school of Shammai”) in first-century Judaism (David Jones and Andreas Köstenberger, “What Did Jesus Teach about Divorce and Remarriage?” Crossway, 2020):
“Also, while contemporary Judaism required divorce in the case of sexual immorality, the text seems to indicate that Jesus merely permitted it (thus implying the need to forgive). That Jesus’s standard regarding divorce was higher even than that of the conservative school of Shammai may therefore adequately account for the disciples’ horrified reaction to Jesus’s teaching in Matthew 19.”
Really? I can just hear the disciples: “Did He just say we can still divorce our wives for messing around, but that we don’t have to? OK, wow, stop the presses, that’s it for me guys, I’m out, that’s going a little too far for my comfort. If that’s the case, then it’s better not to marry!” And yet this is what leading evangelical scholars are telling us with a straight face (see also p. 11, “How do Jesus & Shammai differ?” in Heth, “Jesus on Divorce: How My Mind Has Changed”).
Aside from the absurdity of such a reaction, this response misrepresents the Shammaite position, for the Jews did not divorce for gross sexual immorality (which in the context of marriage equates to adultery), as this, of course, was a capital offense if proven (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22). Instead, the “עֶרְוַ֣ת דָּבָ֔ר” (“erwat dabar,” “indecent thing” or literally “nakedness of a matter”) offense mentioned in Deuteronomy 24:1 would include, at most, only sexual misdemeanors and similar indiscretions, not felony crimes like adultery. Even Don Carson, who argues in favor of “divorce exceptions,” makes this observation (p. 45, D. A. Carson, “Divorce: A Concise Biblical Analysis.” Northwest Journal of Theology. 1975; 4: 43–59.):
“The ‘unseemly thing’ was far more serious than merely messing up domestic chores such as cooking. ‘The phrase itself when viewed in the context of the Old Testament usage surely requires something shameful.’ Nor can the ‘unseemly thing’ be adultery, for the punishment for this is prescribed in Lev. 20:10 and Deut. 22:2. Nor can it be suspicion of adultery, for the procedure to be followed in such cases is given in Num. 5:11–31.”
See “Setting the record straight” in chapter III “The Apostle, the Fathers, and the ‘Prince of Humanists.’”
See chapter II “The Lord of Marriage.”
The NIV renders this verse “Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach […].” Thus, some commentators think this need only require that a man be faithful to his current wife, regardless of whether he is divorced and/or unlawfully married or remarried, even multiple times. Of course, such factors ought to be considered, but given sufficient time and good behavior, they need not be necessarily disqualifying.
But surely this is a lax and loose interpretation of this verse, since a divorced man who is unlawfully remarried to another woman while his first, lawfully-wed wife is living is certainly unfaithful to her, being the husband of more than one living woman, which Jesus and Paul called adultery (Matthew 19:9; Mark 10:11, 12; Luke 16:18a; Romans 7:1-3; 1 Corinthians 7:39). Further, a man who is himself not divorced, but who unlawfully marries a divorced woman, is also unfaithful, since he is with a woman who is still bound to her prior, lawfully-wed, living husband (Matthew 5:32b; Luke 16:18b). Thus, it seems perfectly reasonable to see such scenarios as falling far short of Paul’s “one-woman man” qualification for an overseer.
For just two examples, see footnote 2 in chapter IV “The Rule of the ‘Exceptions.’”
Actually, the answer is “Yes” according to some of our leading evangelical luminaries. For example, in the words of the inimitable (and insufferable) Russell Moore, Editor-in-Chief of the now thoroughly discredited Christianity Today (from the article “Divorcing an Abusive Spouse Is Not a Sin,” emphasis mine):
“If one spouse abandons the home, the Bible reveals, it is not the fault of the innocent party. And if a spouse makes the home a dangerous place for the other spouse (or their children), that is not the fault of the innocent party either. In those cases, divorce is not a sin but is, first of all, a recognition of what is already the case—that the one-flesh union covenant is dissolved—and the abused spouse should feel no condemnation at all in divorcing.”
Chapter XXIV “Of Marriage and Divorce,” section V.
See “Revealing Divorce Statistics In 2023” by Christy Bieber of Forbes.
See “Andy Stanley’s stance on homosexuality questioned” by Michael Foust of Baptist Press.
See “More Baby Boomers are living alone. One reason why: ‘gray divorce’” by Catherine Shoichet and Parker Leipzig of CNN.
See “National Marriage and Divorce Rates Declined From 2011 to 2021” from the U.S. Census Bureau and “The Not-So-Great Reason Divorce Rates Are Declining” by Joe Pinsker of The Atlantic.
From well-known pastors like Voddie Baucham (“The Permanence View of Marriage” sermon), to scholars like J. Carl Laney (The Divorce Myth. Bloomington, MN: Bethany House, 1981), to laypeople like popular conservative commentator Matt Walsh (“If Marriage Isn't Permanent, It's Pointless,” The Matt Walsh Show, episode 35), Bob Mutch (“Except for Fornication Clause of Matthew 19:9.” More Christ Like, 2008), and Timothy Sparks (“Marriage” resources), we are regularly finding others who are coming to conclusions similar to those presented here. We have also encountered a number of ministries that promote the marriage permanence position, including Wise Reaction, Christian Principles Restored, and Monergism, as well as the Christian Divorce and Remarriage and Marriage Permanence YouTube channels. For additional proponents and resources, see footnotes 26–28 in chapter V “The Christian Caught in Adultery.”