The research for this report began a number of years ago in
an attempt to find out what God's Word has to say about divorce and remarriage.
Is divorce wrong? Is the adultery in remarriage an act or a state? In what
cases are divorce and remarriage permitted? What place do divorced and
remarried couples have in the Church? Can the church accept them the same as
any other married couple? As I look at the interesting truths that I found in
Scripture on divorce and remarriage, I have to ask myself, "Why didn't we
see this before?"
It is important that we know and understand what God's truth is about divorce and remarriage. The subject of divorce and remarriage has the potential to be a deciding factor of eternal life or death - Heaven or Hell for someone. One day each of us will be judged by Jesus Christ by God's Law; not the lower court's (the local church's) opinion of God's Law. If the Church has said that a particular divorce and remarriage situation is not sin and God says it is sin, it is too late on Judgment Day for the one who was in that situation to find out God's truth, repent and be saved from hell.
Therefore, divorce and remarriage is a matter of eternity in heaven or hell: a subject of utmost importance for us to understand exactly what God has to say about it. Eternity in hell is too long to risk putting faith in the opinions and reasoning of others. We need to know what the truth is, and what God says is right and wrong.
Divorce and remarriage is a significant subject which many people, as well as the church, face. Many marriages are being severed by divorce. Today, the divorce rate is no different in the church than among the ungodly. Everyone has an opinion about it, and everyone is entitled to hold an opinion about divorce and remarriage. However, the personal opinions and human reasonings that others share tend to obscure what God says about divorce and remarriage. This is particularly true when a line of reasoning (that is in error) is stated by a number of well respected, highly educated Christian sources. When error is repeated as truth, the number of people who believe it to be truth increases. Those who believe that a particular erroneous line of reasoning is truth also see God's truth as error. God's truth on divorce and remarriage then does not make sense because it does not line up with what they have been told and with what they believe to be true.
We need to be like the Bereans and search the Bible for ourselves to see if what is being confidently stated as truth is truth. As I have checked out things that I have read or heard, I have found a lot of error being stated as truth in the church. People who I highly respected had not done the careful research that I thought they had. I also found that often they were relying on the writings of others rather than a careful study of the Bible.
The subject of divorce and remarriage has not been exhaustively studied in the Bible, even though it has been extensively studied and written about. The Bible is a rich gold mine of spiritual truth and there is even more to be learned. In fact I am still learning more as more and more of the puzzle pieces are revealed.
On many doctrines, God speaks His will as clear, and sometimes more clearly,
in the Old Testament than in the New Testament. We find this true on the
doctrine of marriage and divorce. God hates divorce. God says in Malachi
We see from this passage in the Old Testament that divorce and remarriage is a serious matter. We see that God hates divorce. Not only does He hate divorce, but when a Christian divorces their spouse, it removes them from fellowship with God and He no longer receives their worship. Because God expresses His feelings so strongly about divorce, we need to be careful to correctly discern what God is saying on the doctrine of marriage, divorce, and remarriage, lest we be guilty of removing ourselves or others from fellowship with Him.
A couple who committed fornication together before they were married can
never divorce. In Deuteronomy 22:28, 29 God says: "If a man find a damsel
that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with
her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the
damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he
hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." This passage is
significant because it significantly limits what the phrase "saving for
the cause of fornication" in Matt.
Many people view divorce and remarriage as one and the same for purposes of discussion. For instance, the assumption is often made that if a person living in a remarriage situation cannot be accepted as a member in the church, then a person who is divorced is not able to be able to be a member in the church either. When divorce and remarriage are viewed as one and the same, it significantly hinders one from understanding what God says about both divorce and remarriage. The assumption is often made that divorce makes a person single again and that remarriage is the purpose of divorce. Because remarriage is viewed as the purpose for divorce, they view divorce and remarriage as one and the same: if divorce is permitted then remarriage is also. However, this is not the case according to Scripture.
We will see that according to Scripture, divorce and remarriage need to be viewed as two separate events, and therefore as two separate, although related, items for discussion.
God
makes the man and woman one
Marriage is more than a marriage certificate from the civil government. In marriage, God makes the man and the woman one. God says about the being made one aspect in Malachi 2:15: "And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth."
Jesus also stated that it is God who joins a man and woman together as one flesh in marriage: "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.'" Matt. 19:4-6
Divorce is a legal action that the civil government (not God) has established. A couple may go to the church to get married, but they have to go to the civil government to get a divorce. The Church cannot grant a legal divorce. Although divorce can end the legal aspect of a marriage, it cannot end the "one" aspect of the marriage which God has joined together. Once divorce occurs, a person is not single again in God's judgment, and therefore not free to marry another person even if their first spouse has remarried. The "one" union with their spouse can only be ended by the death of one of the marriage partners. According to Jesus, a marriage cannot be ended by the legal proceedings of the court. There will be more on this later.
In the same passage in Malachi 2 where God states that he makes the man and woman one, God also clearly states that after divorce the marriage is still binding "yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant." (Malachi 2:14) Divorce does not end the "one" aspect of the marriage that God joined together when they were married.
God also says, "So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." Romans 7:3.
What is
the Act or Action that is Adultery in Remarriage?
Jesus makes it clear that adultery occurs in remarriage. This is stated clearly in the following passages:
"whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery." (Matt. 5:32);
"whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery" (Matt. 19:9);
"Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." (Mark. 10:11,12);
"Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery." (Lk. 16:18);
"So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." (Rom. 7:3)
The term "adultery" is the Greek word "moichao" Strong's number 3429. In all the Greek lexicons (dictionaries) I checked there was only one definition given for this word and that is "to commit adultery". Thayers adds, "to have unlawful intercourse with another's wife"
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary also gives only one definition for the word adultery: "Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband."
Jesus added to this and stated that a man can commit the sin of adultery in the fantasy of his mind without the physical act taking place. Jesus said that for a man to desire in his mind to have sexual relations with another woman, that man commits adultery in his heart. Mt. 5:28: "But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." According to the definition for the Greek word for adultery that Jesus used, the act or action that is adultery in remarriage is voluntary sexual intercourse with a person whose first husband or wife is still alive. Adultery is not divorce, adulterating the marriage, nor the one time act of remarriage. Adultery is the sexual relations of the remarried couple the first time, and every time thereafter.
Divorce is a serious act of defilement against the spirit and every other aspect of the marriage. But nowhere in the Bible does God say that divorce is adultery. There is no definition in any dictionary or Greek lexicon that says that the action of defiling the marriage is adultery. Adultery is voluntary sexual intercourse, either mentally or physically, where at least one of those involved is married to someone else. Defilement of a marriage is a consequence of adultery. But neither defiling a marriage nor divorce is adultery. Jesus makes it clear that adultery occurs in remarriage, not in divorce. "And whosoever marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." Matt. 19:9b.
What is significant about adultery in remarriage?
When Jesus said, "whosoever shall marry her
that is divorced committeth adultery" (Matt.
Do you get the significance of Jesus' use of the word adultery? Adultery could not occur in remarriage if divorce ended the first marriage. Adultery can only occur in remarriage because the divorced spouse is still married to their first marriage partner in Jesus' judgment. (Jesus is the Judge we will stand before, for our hearing on Judgment Day and it is important that we understand our Judge's reasoning and logic if we want to enter Heaven.)
The significance of the sin of adultery in remarriage is that divorce does not end a person's first marriage! God has joined the husband and wife together as one. "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.'" Matt. 19:4-6. Man's civil action of divorce in the court system of this earth, does not end the "one flesh and one spirit" aspect of the marriage that God has joined together.
Adultery
in Remarriage: An Act or a State?
Is the adultery a one time act that occurs only on the day of remarriage or is the adultery the sexual union of the remarried man and woman throughout their marriage? This question is often phrased: "Is it (the sin of adultery) an act or a state?" Many would like to view the adultery in remarriage as a one time act because then the remarried couple can repent of their one time act and continue in their remarried state without separating or making any other changes. But is the adultery in remarriage only a one time act?
The term "commiteth" (adultery) in Matt. 19:9; and Matt. 5:32 is in the present indicative. Spiros Zodhiates states that "The present tense represents contemporaneous action, as opposed to action in the past or the future. It normally refers to continuous or repeated action. However, in the indicative mood, it may represent punctiliar action. The indicative mood is the only mood in which distinctions can regularly be made about the time when an action occurs. Examples: he will go, they had said, she saw."1 Therefore, the phrase "commits adultery" may refer to a specific time when adultery occurs but it may also refer to continuous or repeated action of adultery. Some have used the present indicative definition to state that the adultery only occurs one time at marriage and does not occur after that. However that conclusion cannot be decisively made from the present indicative. Every act of adultery (sexual relations in remarriage) occurs at a specific point in time and all repeated acts of adultery occur at specific points in time. At the same time the present indicative does not indicate that the act of adultery cannot or does not occur again. There is the possibility with the present indicative that continuous or repeated action of adultery does occur.
God states that the sexual intercourse of a divorced and remarried couple is adultery. Therefore each time they have sexual intercourse they commit an act of adultery. As they continue to have sexual relations and there is no repentance, it becomes a state of adultery. Therefore, adultery in remarriage is both an act each time it occurs, and a continuing state of sinning. The action of remarriage is not adultery.
Both an act or a state of adultery, is sin. Either one bars one from fellowship with Jesus and from entering Heaven. One is guilty of sin before God until they have repented of the sin and stopped the sin. One cannot repent of the "act" adultery but continue in it and expect God to ignore the fact that they are continuing to commit adultery.
The interesting illustration of God and
To gain further insight into God's position on divorce and remarriage, I did
a study on God divorcing
In Jeremiah 3 God states that He gave
God infers that the instruction given in Deut. 24:1-4 on divorce and remarriage is not a command that He gave to Moses. God says in Jer. 3:1 "They say" not "I said" in referring to Deut. 24:1-4. He then goes on to ignore the command that a divorced woman may not return to her first husband by saying "yet return again to me."
Jesus also implied that divorce and remarriage in Deut. 24:1-4 was something that Moses permitted because the people demanded it, but it was not a permission that God gave. Jesus said that from the beginning it was not so. In Matt. 19:8 Jesus said, " Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so." Jesus at no point indicated that Deut. 24:1-4 was a command that God gave to Moses. Hardness of heart is refusing to believe what God has said and is sin. Jesus could not endorse the excuse of hardness of heart as justification to do the opposite of what God had said.
In addition we see that divorce and remarriage did not end God's marriage
covenant with
God asks
Ezekiel was younger than Jeremiah. Ezekiel wrote from captivity in
What is clarified about divorce and remarriage by
the example of God and
1. Neither divorce or remarriage ends the first
marriage. God said to
2. God indicates, and Jesus confirms, that Moses' command allowing divorce and remarriage and prohibiting the returning to the first spouse after remarriage, was not a command that God gave to Moses. It is was something that Moses permitted because of the hardness of people's hearts, and is not one we are to follow, nor can we use it to justify divorce and remarriage. It was never God's will from the beginning. Matt. 19:8 "He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so."
3. God's desire is that the first marriage partners leave all other marriage partners, return, and be reconciled to each other. God said, "Yet return to me" (Jer. 3:1)
4. One must never give up hope that a wayward spouse will return.
Further Scriptural evidence that the first marriage
is not ended by divorce
In looking at whether divorce nullifies the first marriage in God's eyes and therefore makes it permissible for a remarried couple to remain remarried, there are several additional passages of Scripture that indicate that divorce does not end a person's first marriage.
In Malachi 2, God indicates that even though divorce occurs that He still views them as married. In v.14 He states after the divorce has occurred "yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant." God says here that divorce does not end the marriage covenant. After the divorce she is still his wife and companion.
Another passage is Mk. 6:17,18. This is the account of King Herod and Herodias. Even though Herod was not to marry the wife of his brother there is another observation here. The Jewish historian Josephus writing in the latter part of the first century AD tells us that Herodias was divorced from her first husband and had married Herod. This passage indicates that even though she was divorced and remarried she was still considered the wife of her first husband by God. " It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife." If divorce nullified the first marriage in God's eyes, then it would not matter who she married after the divorce. She would no longer be the wife of anyone and it would not be possible for her to marry her husband's brother, because she would not have a husband to marry his brother. John the Baptist was killed by Herod and Herodias because he told them they needed to separate from their immoral remarriage relationship. It was not a message they wanted to hear! The first martyr in the New Testament was John the Baptist, because of the stance he took on a divorce and remarriage situation.
If remarriage had nullified the first marriage, Herod and Herodias would not have been living in sin. But, Herodias was divorced and remarried and they were living in sin.
How remarriage does not end the first
marriage
There is not any example or teaching in Scripture that the act of remarriage ends the first marriage. Nor is there any place in the Bible where the making of a covenant with a second person ended the covenant with the first person. Jesus clearly stated that remarriage does not end the first marriage when He said "Whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." The first marriage is not ended by remarriage. A person can commit adultery only with someone else's husband or wife. If both of the persons involved in sexual immorality are single it is fornication not adultery.
To say that remarriage ends the first marriage is to say that remarriage is the "divorce" from the first marriage. There is nothing that Jesus said that would indicate that remarriage was "divorce" from the first marriage. Romans 7:3 states clearly that remarriage does not end the first marriage and that only death ends the first marriage. "So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." I have not found any place in the Bible that would indicate that remarriage is the "divorce" or an event that ends the first marriage.
What does God say can end a marriage?
God clearly says that the death of one of the marriage partners ends their
marriage and frees them to marry another person. "So then if, while her
husband liveth, she be married to another man, she
shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from
that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.." (Romans 7:3) , Jesus also
said that death ends a marriage in His response to the Sadducees. "And
Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore
err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? For when
they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage;
but are as the angels which are in heaven'" Mark
Death is the only thing that I could find that God says ends a marriage so that the person is free to marry another person.
What does the "exception clause" mean?
There are two "exception clauses" on divorce in Matthew. One of
the first things that I noticed is that they do not address the same thing. It
is often implied that both "exception clauses" give permission for
remarriage. I noticed that the exception clause in Matt.
The second clause is in Matt. 19:9. Here Jesus says: "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. I discovered that modern translators have altered this verse to make it say something totally different than what Jesus originally said. The NIV (and most modern translations) reads totally different than the KJV. The first major change in the NIV is the incorrect twisting of the "translation" of the Greek word pornea as "marital unfaithfulness." By twisting the meaning of pornea, the NIV opens wide the gate for divorce and remarriage in every divorce situation. In every divorce case at least one spouse is maritally unfaithful to their spouse. The very act of one spouse divorcing their mate is a serious act of marital unfaithfulness. In many divorce cases both spouses view the other as being maritally unfaithful in some way. Therefore, the NIV wrongly gives permission for at least one spouse to get remarried in every divorce situation!
The second major change to this passage is the removing of the last third of the verse, the phrase: "and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. " It is wrong to remove words of Jesus from the Bible. This error has led many men and women into the sin of adultery, thinking that it was permissible to remarry. The Church can make changes in the version of the Word of God that it uses, but it can not change the true Word of God that Jesus will use to define sin on Judgment Day.
Divorce and remarriage was common in the
To translate the phrase "except for fornication" as "except for adultery", giving adultery as grounds for divorce and remarriage has some problems. If a man's wife committed adultery, how would her adultery keep him from committing adultery if he divorced her and remarried? Or to ask the question another way, is there any teaching or example in the Bible that would indicate that adultery by one marriage partner ends their marriage and makes them single again in God's eyes? I have not found any Scriptural teaching or example where adultery ended a marriage, unless the spouse committing adultery was stoned. If he or she was stoned to death, that would end the marriage. Jesus' words immediately following this exception clause make it clear that He was not giving permission to remarry after adultery. "And whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery" (He gave no exception). God considers the first marriage valid even after a legal divorce and remarriage.
What then does the "exception clause" mean? Jesus was speaking to Jewish men, the Pharisees, in response to their question when He spoke these words in Matthew 19:9. Jesus said "Except it be for fornication and shall marry another." Fornication is sexual relations with another unmarried person before one is married. The Jews required a man to write a certificate of divorce to end an engagement. We see this illustrated in the story of Joseph and Mary. Joseph believed that Mary had committed fornication with someone else and was planning to divorce her even though they were not yet married, when God stopped him.( Matt. 1:19,20)
What Jesus said to these Jewish men, the Pharisees, in Matt. 19:9 is that divorce and remarriage is sin unless the divorce occurred in the engagement period. Even then the engagement could only be broken if the fiancée committed fornication with another person. Jesus said that if the man divorced his fiancée in the engagement period before marriage occurs, then it is permissible for him to marry another. The exception only applied to the Jewish custom requiring divorce to break an engagement. I could not find any evidence that the Roman law or custom required a certificate of divorce to break an engagement. We do not find the Matt. 19:9 "exception clause" repeated any other place in the Scriptures.
The teaching of the Rabbis in Jesus' day
To correctly understand Jesus' response to the Pharisees in Matthew 19, we need to understand the broader context and what positions the Jews had on divorce and remarriage in Jesus' day. The Pharisees were testing Jesus to see which rabbinical school of thought Jesus would side with. The Roman society around them allowed divorce for any reason. In the Oral Torah, which the Jews in Jesus' day held equal to the Old Testament Scriptures, is found three explanations (schools of thought) of what Moses meant as grounds for divorce. Usually it is stated that there were two schools of thought in Jesus' day, but when I researched it in the Mishnah (The Oral Torah) I found there were three schools of thought. The third school of thought was "no fault" divorce - Rabbi Akiba
The positions of the following three rabbis are found in the Mishnah, Gittin p. 90a, 90b:
The Pharisees were questioning Jesus to see which explanation Jesus would side with. They asked Jesus if divorce was lawful for "any reason". The disciple's response clearly indicates that in Jesus' response He did not side with any of the rabbis' explanations in the Oral Torah. Jesus' exception for divorce was much narrower than "marital unfaithfulness" (NIV). The response of the disciples tells us that Jesus' response to the Pharisees did not support any of the schools of thought in the Oral Torah. "His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry." Matt. 19:10. Jesus' response to the Pharisees also tells us that He did not side with any of the Rabbis interpretations of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 in the Oral Torah. He said that the permission allowing divorce and remarriage had never been God's will. "From the beginning it was not so."
How
divorce among Christians is disobedience to God's command not to take a
believer to court.
1Cor 6:1-11 "Dare any of you, having a matter against another,
go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? 2 Do ye not know that
the saints shall judge the world? and if the world
shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Know
ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more
things that pertain to this life? 4 If then ye have judgments of things
pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the
church. 5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among
you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between
his brethren? 6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. 7 Now therefore
there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why
do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather
suffer yourselves to be defrauded? 8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that
your brethren. 9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the
How Divorce Removes One From Fellowship With God --The need
for Forgiveness and Reconciliation
God tells us that divorce removes one from fellowship with Him. In Malachi
In a divorce situation there is a lot of hurt, anger, and bitterness that occurs between the couple, the children, the extended families of the couple (their parents, grandparents, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, and cousins) and friends. These deep wounds of a divorce affects those impacted by the divorce for the rest of their lives. God makes it clear that these wrongs and offenses need to be repented of and reconciliation needs to occur.
Matt.
God also makes it clear that one needs to forgive any offenses that the other spouse has committed. All bitterness, anger, and hatred need to be repented of and put away. This is what God says:
Mk.
Matt.
Matt. 18:35" So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses." ("his trespasses" has been removed from the NIV. Immediately following this verse is Jesus teaching on divorce and remarriage.)
I John 2:9-11 "He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. 10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. 11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes."
I John 4:20,21" If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also."
Because divorce removes a Christian from fellowship with God, that person needs to be sorry, repent of the sin of divorcing their spouse, and ask God to forgive them. That person also needs to go to all the family members and tell them that they are sorry for the hurts and offenses that they have caused them through the divorce and ask for their forgiveness. In addition, that person needs to forgive all the offenses that brought about the divorce and the offenses that occurred in the divorce process, whether the other spouse is sorry and asks forgiveness or not.
"If anyone does not provide for his own"
"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (I Timothy 5:8) God says this about providing for a person's mother to whom they have not made any vows. How much more does this apply to a man providing for his wife to whom he has made a vow to provide and care for. The same is also true for the wife. She has made a vow to care for her husband. Divorce is an abandonment of provision for one's spouse and is the same as denying the faith. It is sin. To take this one step further, it is also sin before God for a divorced man not to pay child support for his children.
God expects us to take our responsibilities to provide and care for our family members very seriously. If Christians do not provide for their own families, they deny the faith and are worse than unbelievers.
Does it make a difference if a couple is
divorced and remarried before they become Christians?
It does not make a difference if a person began to commit a sin before or after they became a Christian; it is still sin. If they continue to commit the sin after they become a Christian, it is still sin. Asking God's forgiveness does not give license to continue in sin or to continue in an adulterous marriage.
Some quote I Cor. 7:17-24 to indicate that a man and a woman who were remarried before they became Christians should remain in the state in which they were called. This passage is not addressing remarriage, nor is it in the context of remarriage or any other sin. This passage is addressing whether one needs to become a Jew when they become a Christian or if they need to stop being a Jew, and the same with being a slave or a free man. To state that this passage is saying that every person should remain in the marital state in which they were when they became a Christian, then one would also have to state that if a person became a Christian while they were single they should not get married; persons living in homosexual situations should remain in that situation after they become Christians; and a man and a woman who are living together and not married should remain unmarried and still live together after they become Christians. This is contrary to all of Scripture. I Cor. 7:17-24 is not addressing the marriage state one is to be in after becoming a Christian, nor does it say that people should continue to remain in a situation that causes them to sin after they become Christians.
Herod and Herodias were not believers and it was wrong for them to be married. The solution was not for them to believe in Jesus and then they could continue in their adulterous relationship. Remarriage is not a sin only for Christians. Sin is sin regardless if the person committing the sin is a believer or a person who has never made a commitment to Christ.
How the marriage vow of a remarried couple does not
supersede God's law
The question is sometimes asked, "What about the vow that the remarried couple has made?" God has told us that we are to keep the vows that we make. The first marriage vow is still in effect and they are still obligated to fulfill that vow. Making a second vow does not nullify the first vow. A person cannot have two covenants in effect at the same time that promises the same thing to two different people. The vow that a person makes in a remarrage situation will never nullify the way God's law applies to his life. If we say that a remarried couple should continue to live together and have sexual relations together because of their marriage vows in the remarriage, then we are saying that their remarriage vows have precedence over God's law. God's law about divorce and remarriage no longer applies to them. This is wrong.
The Pharisees used this same line of reasoning, that making a vow changed what God says is sin in the issue of Corban in Mark 7:9-13. " And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. 10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: 11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. 12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; 13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye." The Pharisees said a man no longer had to follow God's law in honoring his parents by supporting them in their old age if he made the vow of Corban. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for this teaching because they were nullifying God's law. Jesus told them that they made the Word of God of no effect through their tradition (see v.13)
In remarriage the marriage vow that a man and woman make, does not nullify what Jesus said that whoever marries a divorced person commits adultery. The marriage vow cannot nullify the sin of adultery in remarriage. If it did it would supersede God's Law.
The marriage vow of Herod and Herodias did not supersede God's law that a man was not to marry his brother's wife. John the Baptist spoke out strongly after their marriage that it was sin, and indicated that the marriage needed to end. Even though Herodias had divorced her husband and made other marriage vows, the second marriage was sin.
How grace does not stop remarriage from being sin
The topic of the church granting a remarried couple grace often comes up with the subject of divorce and remarriage. The argument that the church can grant a remarried couple grace to continue in their remarriage relationship has become a stumblingblock for many.
To understand grace better, I did an in-depth study of grace in the Bible. I found some interesting facts. The main fact is that grace is from God. Most of the verses in the New Testament that use the word grace also state that it is from God or Jesus. Nowhere is there any verse that the church has any authority to grant another grace for their sins. We can bless another with God's grace, but not from us. When the church grants another person grace in a sin area so that the sin is no longer viewed as sin, the church is setting themselves up as God and making the church equal with God. This line of thinking has occurred before in Jeremiah 7:9,10: "Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye know not; (10) And come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, We are delivered to do all these abominations?" They thought they had received grace to continue in their sins but they had not.
Grace is not an allowance to sin a little more than what the Bible says.
Grace is not a license from God or the church for one to continue in sin as
many would lead us to believe. Grace is not God overlooking our sin as we
continue to sin after we know better. Romans 6:1-2 "What shall we say
then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? (2) God forbid. How
shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" Romans
There is no grace for those who willfully continue to sin and don't want to stop or change because it would be "too difficult". God's grace is not a license to do what is right in one's own eyes, and follow one's own beliefs, even if it is contrary to Scripture.
Who forgives sin? Can Christians grant forgiveness for sin against God? No. We can only grant forgiveness for offences to us. We cannot grant a person grace for offences that they are committing against God when they have not repented to God and stopped their sin.
When Jesus through grace forgave the woman caught in adultery, He also told her to do something. He said "go and sin no more!" Jesus did not give the woman grace so that she could continue to commit adultery. Jesus told her she had to stop committing adultery. When a divorced and remarried couple repents and receives forgiveness from God for the adultery that they have committed, they must change so that they can also obey Jesus' command to go and sin no more. If they go on sinning and committing adultery they will not receive God's grace but rather incur His judgment. There cannot be grace and mercy without justice.
When a person realizes that they have sinned by divorcing their spouse and remarrying another, and they go to God and confess their sin and forsake the sin of remarriage, God forgives them. It is only through the grace of God that they receive forgiveness. Without God's grace none of us would be saved because we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God.
How the hardness of one's heart does not make the
sins of divorce and remarriage right
Jesus said Moses allowed divorce and remarriage because of the hardness of
their hearts. The hardness of their hearts did not make the sins of divorcing
and remarrying right. There are a number of places where God said "go
ahead" because they were hard hearted, but they received God's wrath or
consequences because of it. Baalam is one example.
Another was
God made it clear through the prophet Malachi that divorce was never His will even in Old Testament times. He states stronger in Malachi than any other place in Scripture that He hates divorce. The hardness of one's heart does not supersede or negate God's Law.
Why "put away" means "to
divorce", not merely "to separate" in Matt.
There is a teaching that a number of people are promoting that states that the Greek word for "put away" in Matt. 5:32 and Matt. 19.9 does not mean "to divorce", but that "put away" means a separation without a divorce, and is something totally different from "divorce". They state that "apostasion" (Strongs #647) is the Greek word for divorce and that if Jesus had meant divorce then He would have used "apostasion" instead of "apoluo" (Strongs #630) ("put away" — which they say means to separate without a divorce). This teaching totally changes the interpretation of the passages on divorce and remarriage and some of them hold that divorce and remarriage is a gift from God. This teaching sounds very convincing and is hard to argue with as long as you accept their narrow definition for "apoluo" (put away) and do not check if their definition is correct. The entire teaching hinges on the definition of the word "apoluo" — "put away". Let me repeat, the definition of the word "apoluo" is what the teaching stands on.
The following explains what is wrong with the teaching that "put away" ("apoluo") in the Matthew passages means "to separate without a divorce, and that it is not referring to divorce", and why it is a false teaching:
4.
The following are the definitions found in a number of Greek lexicons. The newest Greek lexicons are listed first.
apoluo
ap-ol-oo'-o
Strong's #630
Does "not under bondage" mean a person
can remarry?
The assumption that is sometimes made is that God in I Cor. 7:12-16 is giving an exception that allows remarriage. I Cor. 7:12-16 states: "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife"
There are several things that are clear in this passage. The first is that Paul states that v. 12-16 are a principle that he is giving and it is not a direct command of God - "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord."
The second is that the command from God which is given first in v.10,11 states that a woman who departs from her husband is to remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. Verses 10 and 11 state: " And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." Therefore to interpret "not under bondage" in v. 15 as meaning that one can remarry would contradict the command that God had given in v.11. A better interpretation of "not under bondage" is if the unbelieving spouse leaves the believing spouse, the believing spouse is not under bondage, or obligation to keep the marriage together. However, she is not free to chase him out of the house or to remarry.
Further, to interpret "not under bondage" as meaning that one is free from the marriage is to imply that the Bible views marriage as bondage. This is not true. Many people view their marriage as bondage because they desire to be free from it. But the Bible does not teach that marriage is bondage. God's way is not bondage!
How the culture in Jesus' day was very much like
ours today
One of the things that I have discovered as I have researched different
doctrines is that many Christian scholars often do not do the careful research
that we assume that they have done. Things get repeated over and over and are
believed to be true, but people don't take the time to verify that what they
are repeating is accurate. We hear over and over that society was very much a
male dominated, women suppressed Middle Eastern culture in New Testament times.
What has happened is that they have mixed two hundred years before Christ with
New Testament times. It would be like someone two thousand years from now
attempting to describe society today by studying life in colonial
Some time ago I went to the library of Congress to research the role of
women in the
"The centuries between the Principate and the Empire saw the 'emancipation' of Roman women. The new rights (except of course political rights, which in Rome as in Greece were reserved for men) allowed women, it has been said, to instruct themselves and cultivate their intellectual interests, to attempt many activities that had been for men only, and to make full use of the law to end unhappy marriages and contract new ones. They practiced birth control and abortion, formed freely chosen amorous bonds, lived outside of matrimony, and enjoyed a new liberty that had been absolutely unthinkable- sexual freedom." (emphasis added)
Several pages later she states: "Beginning in the first century AD,
references to abortion become increasingly numerous... The practice of
voluntarily interrupting pregnancy was evidently common. This is demonstrated
by the interest in the problem on the part of physicians, such as Soranus of Ephesus (who practiced in
The Book of Acts also testifies to the fact that women had many more
"liberties" than the picture often painted for us of a male
chauvinistic society that was tough on women and where women were little more
than men's servants. The following tells us that women as well as men had
leadership roles in the Roman society. "And some of them believed, and
consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and
of the chief women not a few." (Acts 17:4).
"But the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable
women, and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul
and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts." (Acts
The change in the roles of Roman woman affected the Jewish women as well.
The fact that the "emancipation" of Roman women had affected the
Jewish culture and Jewish women is evidenced by the fact that Jewish women were
able to divorce their husbands. Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews book
XVIII states that Herodias, a Jew, divorced herself from her husband while he
was alive, and was married to Herod, her husband's brother. The second is the
statement by Jesus in Mark
We can see from the above description, that society in Jesus' day was very similar to ours today in the role of women and the practice of divorce and remarriage. It is important that we correctly understand the culture in Jesus' day so that we can correctly understand what Jesus was saying.
What the early Christians wrote about divorce and
remarriage
The writings of the early Christians are significant to help us to understand what God says in the Bible about divorce and remarriage for several reasons: These men lived very shortly after the writing of the New Testament. The apostles had only passed away a short while before their time. They were not separated from the writing of the New Testament by almost two thousand years like we are. They also understood the cultural setting in which the New Testament was written. What the early Christians wrote is also significant because the society in which they lived was so similar to ours today -- divorce and remarriage was very common. Many of these writings were widely circulated among the churches, which adds to the credibility of what they say. The early Christians knew Greek. The New Testament Greek was not a foreign language to them as it is for us or even a "dead' language as it is today. These men were fluent in Greek. For many it was their native tongue.
What is significant is that in all of the writings of the early Christians, I did not find any teaching that the early Church believed that Jesus' words in Matthew 19:9, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery," permitted remarriage. I was not able to find remarriage allowed in any of the writings of the early Christians before 300 AD. They all speak the same thing that remarriage after divorce is sin.
The early Christians spoke clearly on divorce and remarriage. What they wrote is significant for our understanding of God's judgment of divorce and remarriage.
Justin Martyr around AD 150 writes: "And 'Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced from another husband, committeth adultery.' and, 'There are some who have been made eunuchs of men, and some who were born eunuchs, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake; but all cannot receive this saying.' So that all who, by human law, are twice married, are in the eye of our Master sinners, and those who look upon a woman to lust after her."2 (emphasis added)
Athenagoras the Athenian in AD 177 wrote A plea for the Christians. In it he writes: "For we bestow our attention, not on the study of words, but on the exhibition and teaching of action, - that a person should either remain as he was born, or be content with one marriage; for a second marriage is only a specious adultery. 'For whosoever puts away his wife,' says He, 'and marries another, commits adultery'; not permitting a man to send her away whose virginity he has brought to an end, nor to marry again."3
Clement of Alexandria writing around AD 194 on the "exception clause" states that the only exception for divorce is for remarried couples to end their sinful marriage: "Now that the Scripture counsels marriage, and allows no release from the union, is expressly contained in the law, 'Thou shalt not put away thy wife, except for the cause of fornication;' and it regards as fornication, the marriage of those separated while the other is alive."4
Tertullian writing around AD 200 says: "I maintain, then, that there was a condition in the prohibition which He now made of divorce; the case supposed being, that a man put away his wife for the express purpose of marrying another. His words are: 'Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery; and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband, also committeth adultery,' - 'put away,' that is, for the reason wherefore a woman ought not to be dismissed, that another wife may be obtained. For he who marries a woman who is unlawfully put away is as much of an adulterer as the man who marries one who is undivorced. Permanent is the marriage which is not rightly dissolved; to marry, therefore, whilst matrimony is undissolved, is to commit adultery."... "For in the Gospel of Matthew he says, 'Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery.' He also is deemed equally guilty of adultery, who marries a woman put away by her husband. The creator, however, except on account of adultery, does not put asunder what He Himself joined together, the same Moses in another passage enacting that he who had married after violence to a damsel, should thenceforth not have it in his power to put away his wife. Now, if a compulsory marriage contracted after violence to a damsel, shall be permanent, how much rather shall a voluntary one, the result of agreement! This has the sanction of the prophet: 'Thou shalt not forsake the wife of thy youth.' "5
Tertullian also states, "The fact that (he) who shall have dismissed his wife, except on the ground of adultery, makes her commit adultery; and (he) who shall have married a (woman) dismissed by her husband, of course commits adultery. A divorced woman cannot even marry legitimately; and if she commit any such act without the name of marriage does it not fall under the category of adultery, in that adultery is a crime in the way of marriage? Such is God's verdict, within straighter limits than men's, that universally, whether through marriage or promiscuously, the admission of a second man (to intercourse) is pronounced adultery by Him. For let us see what marriage is in the eye of God; and thus we shall learn what adultery equally is. Marriage is (this): when God joins "two into one flesh;" or else, finding (them already) joined in the same flesh, has given His seal to the conjunction. Adultery is (this): when the two having been - in whatsoever way - disjoined, other - nay, rather alien - flesh is mingled (with either): flesh concerning which it cannot be affirmed, 'This is flesh out of my flesh, and this bone out of my bones.' A little later he states "But they (the Romans) indulge in promiscuous adulteries, even without divorcing (their partners): to us, even if we do divorce them, even marriage will not be lawful."6
We see from the above statements of the early church leaders that the early church took a clear stand that remarriage was sin and was not permitted by Christians even though society around them believed and practiced otherwise. This clear stand against divorce and remarriage by the early church removes yet another prop from those who would like to interpret the teachings of Jesus as allowing/permitting remarriage. It appears that it has only been in recent years that the church has reversed its beliefs and has permitted remarriage.
How the inaccuracy of the NIV has changed the way
the church views divorce and remarriage.
If you take one lie and add it to the Bible it will kill people spiritually just like any other poison. It is crucial that we use an accurate edition of God's Word that has not been altered by words being removed and mistranslated. In studying the doctrine of marriage, divorce, and remarriage, it has become clearer and clearer to me that the translation that one studies from usually affects one's understanding of what God says about divorce and remarriage. I had always assumed that the NIV (New International Version) and the KJV said the same thing. They don't! Through the choice of words and the removal of words, the NIV leads a person to a different conclusion than what God said. My observation is that those people and churches who have changed what they believe on divorce and remarriage have done so after studying this doctrine in the NIV or other modern translations that are based on the same incomplete Greek text as the NIV.
How the NIV changed the Bible in Jeremiah 3:1
"They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the LORD." Jeremiah 3:1 (KJV)
The NIV reads the exact opposite of what God said. The NIV removed the words
"They say" and changed the command "yet return to Me" into a question: "would you now return to
me?" The NIV reads like this: "If a man divorces his wife and she
leaves him and marries another man, should he return to her again? Would not
the land be completely defiled? But you have lived as a prostitute with many
lovers — would you now return to me?"(NIV). In
this verse God refers to the passage in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 where Moses gave
permission for divorce and remarriage, and prohibited a remarried person from
returning to their spouse. By using the words "They say" (the words
the NIV removed), God stated that Deut. 24:1-4 on divorce and remarriage was
not a command that He had given. The NIV by removing words and changing a
command into a question has God saying that He gave the command in Deut.
24:1-4. The NIV then has God contradicting Himself later on in verses 12, 14,
and 22 asking
How the NIV changed the Bible in Matthew 19:9
" And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery" Matt. 19:9 (KJV)
This is the main verse that Christians today use to justify divorce and remarriage. The NIV seriously corrupts what Jesus said about divorce and remarriage, using the words "marital unfaithfulness" (Which is not what the Greek word means. See the section on the exception clause.) making Jesus say that divorce and remarriage is permissible for any infraction of the marriage vows by the other spouse. The NIV then removed the last part of the verse, "and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery." The shorten version of this verse by the NIV reads like this: "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." (NIV) This is a serious corruption of Jesus' words by the NIV. With that last phrase removed, the NIV has Jesus saying that remarriage is allowed for at least one spouse after every divorce. In every divorce at least one and usually both spouses commit acts of marital unfaithfulness. The very filing for divorce is marital unfaithfulness.
How the NIV changed the Bible in Matt. 5:32
"But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery" Matt. 5:32 (KJV) The NIV again used the inaccurate translation of "marital unfaithfulness" instead of fornication: "But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to commit adultery, and anyone who marries a woman so divorced commits adultery." (NIV)
How the NIV changed the Bible in Mark 10:29
The NIV removed the words "or wife". "And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, there is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's," (KJV) The NIV has: "'I tell you the truth' Jesus replied, 'no one has left home of brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel'" With the words "or wife" removed there are some who use the NIV who teach that there is nothing in Scripture that says that a couple in a remarriage situation should separate. However, this is a passage that applies to directly to a remarriage situation. Because remarriage is sin, a man needs to leave his "wife" in remarriage (she is legally his wife in the civil judicial system but not in God's judicial system). The reason for a man to leave his wife of remarriage is for Jesus' sake and the Gospel's. As a Christian, he must turn his back on sin and go and sin no more. God promises in the next verse that He will abundantly bless a person who has turned their back on the things of this world for Jesus' sake and the Gospel's, and in the age to come eternal life.
How the NIV omitted an entire verse from the Bible in Mark 11:26
"But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven
forgive your trespasses" Mk.
The NIV omitted this entire verse on forgiveness. The NIV has verse 25 and verse 27, but there is no verse 26! This is a significant verse that applies to many people who have divorced or who are going through a divorce. Many divorces are a result of the marriage partners being unwilling to forgive each other. Jesus said in this verse that if a person does not forgive, they are lost, they are not a Christian!
How the NIV changed the meaning of the Bible in I Corinthians 7:15
This is a very subtle corruption. The words here appear at first to be saying the same thing. However the NIV's use of the words "is not bound" indicates that the believing spouse is freed from the marriage. The KJV says that "a brother or sister is not under bondage in such cases." Scripture no where indicates that the marriage covenant should be viewed as being under bondage, but rather as a commitment and a responsibility. To interpret "under bondage" to mean that one is freed from the marriage and can remarry contradicts what God says in verse 10.
Lest one think that these are isolated verses that have been corrupted in the NIV, I have personally documented over 400 passages where the NIV has changed something significant, like in the above verses, in the words of the Bible. In most of those passages something significant was omitted.
In the past almost 20 years as the NIV has become the top selling Bible in the U.S. the church has had a dramatic change in its position on divorce and remarriage. The corrupt reading of the NIV has undermined the foundation of the convictions of many of our church leaders. There are a growing number of church leaders who are stating that they are no longer completely sure what the truth is on divorce and remarriage.
A person studying the NIV and a person studying the KJV will tend to come to two different conclusions on divorce and remarriage. The corruption of God's words on divorce and remarriage in the NIV is so significant that the NIV cannot be used to study the doctrine of marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Every time you read these verses in the NIV you read error.
When I first began studying the doctrine of marriage, divorce and
remarriage, I was still using the NIV. I soon discovered in doing word studies
that the NIV's words "except for marital
unfaithfulness" were a wrong translation of the Greek. However, because it
was there in my Bible, I continued to write it down in my research as if it was
a valid phrase. I discovered that a person can know something is error, but
unless we get rid of it, it will mislead us into believing error. Do not use
the NIV,
How children do not get a true father when the
divorced mother remarries.
One of the reasons used to justify remarriage after divorce is because the children need a father. However remarriage after divorce is different than remarriage after the death of a spouse. After divorce, the former lover who fathered the children is still living and visits his children. In that second marriage, the children are to the new husband as illegitimate children by another lover. There is no way that he can love those children as he should, or as he would his own children. He therefore does not discipline the children as sons and daughters and the children end up without proper love, discipline, and training. The children do not get a true father. This principle is found in several passages of Scripture and explains one reason why God hates divorce: God desires Godly children.
Heb. 12:6-8 "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons."
Mal.
What if the Remarried Couple has Children by the
Second Marriage?
The question arises: should a remarried couple separate if they have had children by the second marriage? The fact that a couple has children in the second marriage does not end the first marriage. The responsibilities that they have to their children in their second marriage does not change the fact that if they continue in the remarriage situation it is adultery. In addition, the responsibilities they have to the children in the second marriage are not more important than the vows and covenant that they made in their first marriage and the responsibilities they have to any children in the first marriage.
God gives us some examples where children from a wrong relationship had to be sent away:
Abraham did his own thing rather than following the Lord, and took Hagar and had a son by her. After Isaac was weaned, because of Ishmael's scoffing, Sarah asked Abraham to send Hagar and Ishmael away. Sarah did not feel that Ishmael deserved to receive an inheritance with Isaac. Abraham was very displeased by Sarah's request because Ishmael was his son. However, God told him to not let it be displeasing to him and to send Hagar and Ishmael away. Abraham arose early the next morning and obeyed God's command promptly and sent them away. Gen. 21:8-21
Another account is in Ezra 9:1-15 and 10:1-44, where many of the Israelites
were involved in wrong marriages. They had married foreign wives and many had
children by those wives. They recognized that they had sinned against God
(10:2). The solution to the situation of the wrong marriages was that they needed
to put away the wives and the children that they had by those wives. It was a
difficult situation and one that was very difficult to have the courage to deal
with. It was so difficult that the Godly Ezra had to be prodded to take his
responsibility as spiritual leader and deal with the situation. In Ezra 10:4 he
was told, "Arise; for this matter belongeth unto
thee: we also will be with thee: be of good courage, and do it" (See also Neh.
Ezra 10:1-4 "Now when Ezra had prayed, and when he had confessed, weeping and casting himself down before the house of God, there assembled unto him out of Israel a very great congregation of men and women and children: for the people wept very sore. 2 And Shechaniah the son of Jehiel, [one] of the sons of Elam, answered and said unto Ezra, We have trespassed against our God, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land: yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing. 3 Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of my lord, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law. 4 Arise; for this matter belongeth unto thee: we also will be with thee: be of good courage, and do it."
Parents have a responsibility to provide for every child that they bring into the world, regardless of the marriage situation when they were conceived. We are told in I Timothy 5:8 "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." Not only are they responsible to provide for their physical needs, they are also responsible to train all their children in the ways of the Lord. A parent can not teach their children to keep all of God's commands, if the parent has willfully chosen to continue to live in sin in an adulterous remarriage relationship. More is caught than taught, and the children will not learn to keep all of God's commands as they should.
The children receive a greater spiritual training if they see their parents willing to make whatever sacrifices and hard, hard decisions that are necessary to be in a right relationship with Jesus Christ. Remaining in a remarriage situation for the sake of the children, and living in sin, will not in the long run be a benefit for their children. The children will grow up with the perception that one can do what is right in their own eyes.
Why a remarried couple needs to separate
Jesus' command to the woman caught in adultery after He forgave her was
"Go and sin no more" (John