12 :: Quagmire #2
When is divorce the right (or “acceptable”) choice in a marriage?
Since 1998. On WP for 954 days.
Post feed | Comment feed | Photo feed
When is divorce the right (or “acceptable”) choice in a marriage?
Since 1998. On WP for 954 days.
Post feed | Comment feed | Photo feed
May 12th, 2008 at 8:51 am EST
This is a tough one. I’m getting divorced because I’m in an abusive relationship. I stuck with him for almost 15 years, but I do not feel like God is condemning me for getting out. Of course this is not a snap decision–there have been interventions, counselors, friends, and family who all tried to help. Nothing worked.
May 12th, 2008 at 12:03 pm EST
Matthew 5:32, “But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, EXCEPT FOR MARITAL UNFAITHFULNESS, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.”
Alright, these words, which Jesus spoke, got my mother in law and my own mom through the divorce. I fully believe that the word, “unfaithfulness” applies to cheating, abuse, or any kind of unfaithfulness within a marriage.
Does this help?
May 12th, 2008 at 1:01 pm EST
So if my wife yells at me (abuse) or becomes more faithful to her job than to me, it’s okay to divorce her? That’s a pretty grey interpretation of a black-and-white verse, and an interesting twist on Jesus’ words to first century Jews.
Other versions of the Bible use the words “unchastity”, “sexual promiscuity”, “sexual immorality”, “fornication”, “terrible sexual sin”, “sexual relations with another man”, “marital unfaithfulness”, “adultery”, “not been faithful”, “sex sin”, and “whoredom”. It’s the greek word porneia, and refers to a violation of Jewish marriage law where the woman sleeps with another man. It’s pretty clear what Jesus is talking about here (except in the vanilla NIV).
With that being said, I think it’s interesting how much emphasis and importance Jesus places on sexual intimacy at the end of the marriage relationship. So what should that say about how careful and purposeful we are at the beginning?
May 12th, 2008 at 1:07 pm EST
if this verse [and the issue in general] is so clearly black-and-white, would we be having this dialogue?
food for thought, God also gave Israel a certificate of divorce.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:19 pm EST
Because we’re taking something that was spoken to first century Jews and applying it to a very different context. It’s not a terrible thing to do, but we need to understand why Jesus said these things before figuring out how to apply them in our culture. Anonymous’ situation is very different from Jesus’ audience!
mdog, can you tell us more about that certificate? I don’t know what you’re referring to …
May 12th, 2008 at 1:53 pm EST
jeremiah 3:8.
not looking to get into an exegetical debate… i really am just throwing it out here for discussion. obviously, Israel could not be sexually unfaithful to God; and yet here He is, issuing a certificate of divorce. God initiated a divorce. clearly God is just and righteous… so, what is it about Israel that prompted God to make such a decision, and what do we do with that?
i have no answers, only questions.
May 12th, 2008 at 3:11 pm EST
I had never read that before … consistent with what I knew about that covenant relationship, yet hugely explicit and specific. Thanks for sending that on, mdog … maybe I should spend some more time in Jeremiah.
And yet, though it all, God asks His unfaithful to return … wow.
May 12th, 2008 at 3:20 pm EST
God’s original design for marriage did not allow for divorce. Divorce was introduced due to the hardness of people’s hearts. In other words, due to our stupidity.
Read Matthew 19:4-8 to see Jesus’ response to the Pharisees on this very question. He said “It was not this way from the beginning.” Its important not to read scripture out of context, so reading verse 9 without reading the whole chapter doesn’t really work.
mdog, I appreciate that your link to Jeremiah brings up the full context of God’s “divorce” with Israel. Notice that Israel was unfaithful and “committed adultery” with other gods and got what they had coming to them.
May 12th, 2008 at 4:01 pm EST
O.k., several thoughts:
First, by “I think it’s interesting how much emphasis and importance Jesus places on sexual intimacy at the end of the marriage relationship,” are you referring to adultery? Well, I don’t think for a minute that the primary reason adultery occurs is because of a lack of sexual compatibility. Generally, other needs are not being met within the marriage, so one person begins to seek that elsewhere. But whichever needs are not being met, I believe that the root problem is often a lack of communication.
Next, yes, God initiated a divorce in the instance mentioned above. And yes, he recognizes a reality that diverges from his original plan for marriage and therefore establishes some regulations for how it should be carried out (Matt. 19:3-9). But I think the actual instances where that is the “correct” or even an “acceptable” choice are very limited. True, our culture differs from Bible times in many ways, and we need to learn how to apply the truths of Scripture to what has become our reality. Obviously, there are extreme situations, of abuse or infidelity for example, that may warrant divorce, but defining exactly what constitues abuse or infidelity is a little trickier. I’m not going to attempt to do that here. I will say, however, that I believe “incompatibility” is an unacceptable excuse for divorce. I think people in our culture have gotten lazy: relationships take work, and we should expect that and be prepared to make the effort before entering into marriage. And our culture has also made divorce too easy and acceptable a “solution.”
And finally, love. We put so much emphasis on this “feeling,” and yet love is also a choice. (Kind of like anger…) Once you have chosen your spouse and have made a commitment to that person before God, you’d better continue to choose love even when the feeling doesn’t come so easily. (Not YOU, but in general. You know.)
May 12th, 2008 at 4:09 pm EST
Good stuff, Jenn.
May 12th, 2008 at 5:16 pm EST
Yeah, really good stuff. I’m a big fan of faithfulness, a la Hosea and Gomer.
My logic was starting with divorce and working chronologically backwards, not starting with compatibility and moving forwards. I was merely pointing out how divorce’s determining factor, according to Jesus, is sex. It’s obviously a very important, if not the most important, component of a marriage relationship (if it’s the lynchpin for ending that relationship). So shouldn’t we be paying much more attention to it before we get married?
May 12th, 2008 at 7:49 pm EST
I was just saying that it helped some people I know. Sorry.
May 12th, 2008 at 10:26 pm EST
Are you still stuck on compatibility?
(1) The purpose of marriage is to provide a completeness of being — Genesis 2 — He makes them one flesh, inseparable in this life. That was the thrust of Jesus’ statement that what God had joined together could not be undone by human efforts; it echoes in what Paul states regarding a fornicator being joined to a harlot. The penalty for adultery, under the Law, was death, not divorce, and both transgressors were to die.
(2) The granting of a divorce mechanism, because of the “hardness of their hearts” (trans. “self fulfillment”, “self centeredness”) was a way of extending mercy, because the accusation of unfaithfulness prior to marriage was difficult to defend against, and divorce was a protection to the woman so accused. Nevertheless, once having been married, and having been given the divorce certificate, the perspective of Jesus was that the paper meant nothing in reality; if she were to remarry, she would commit adultery, and any man marrying her committed adultery, because in God’s eyes she never ceased being the wife of the first man she married.
(3) The interesting part is that Jesus immediately afterward deals with oath-breaking. When a man and woman bind themselves before witnesses to carry out their marriage, the breaking of that oath (so you call it a vow, does that change anything?), especially using such terms as “until death parts us” makes the oath-breaker a liar. Liars are fuel for the Lake of Fire, from what I’ve read. (So next time you sign on the line to renew your license plates or driver’s license, pay attention to what you are vowing to do!)
(4) Under God’s plan, the onus for family stability was on the husband. He is responsible for everything that occurs within his family. He may not like that responsibility, and society may try to take it from him, but once he commits to marriage, the responsibility is his, and he will give account to God for it. Read 1 Cor. 7 carefully; if an unbelieving spouse runs away because of the believer’s commitment to Christ, the believer is not required to insist that they stay. That does not, however, free the one left behind to break their vows.
(5) One last thing. Under the Law, the divorced wife could remarry, but could never go back to her first husband. Again, consider the reason — hardness of heart. God’s intent was to avoid confusion in family relationships. His lesson with respect to Hosea and Gomer was an illustration of the extent to which grace and forgiveness was part of His character. Repeatedly in the Old Testament He tells Israel to come back to Him despite the national idolatry. The ability of a wronged spouse to forgive the sinning partner should be an outgrowth of the recognition of how far Jesus went to secure our own forgiveness. Restoration of a broken marriage provides the ultimate earthly parallel to the restoration of our own fellowship with our Creator. To legitimize divorce is to overthrow grace and place oneself back under the Law as a means of self-salvation, and the one who breaks the smallest commandment is guilty of breaking all of them.
(6) Maybe you need to have your Dad and Mom pick out a nice girl for you and make the arrangements with her family. Then you might not be so conflicted over all this stuff.
May 13th, 2008 at 1:14 am EST
Quagmire #11?
May 13th, 2008 at 8:39 am EST
Even though I’m not there yet, I would disagree with you, Lance, that sex is THE most important part of marriage. I would say, instead, that it is more of an indicator of what is going on in the entire marriage relationship. So if one member of the relationship is committing adultery, there are other relational things that are happening that are not-so-great. To go off of Ben’s comment on the previous post, it is definitely an important part of the whole, but I would say that it is only part of the whole. All of the other pieces of the relationship need to be going smoothly for the physical intimacy to be going smoothly. So when Jesus is talking about sexual unfaithfulness, it’s the action that shows where the relationship and heart have been for a while. Just a thought.