[ Bottom of Page ]

Reaching forth...

By God's grace, still presenting the same old message from the same old Book...

First, I do not want to give encouragement to any that would approach the things of God looking for a way to accommodate and make the works of the flesh appear approved. Salvation is from sin, and not in sin. 

There are times we do things and are not settled in our mind, but still we are convinced what we do is needed. Paul spoke of such times (2Cor 7:5). 

2 Corinthians 7:5 For, when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled on every side; without were fightings, within were fears.

As with any subject presented in our Bible, our searching will not exhaust all to be learned. This article is hoped to be a help but it must be realized this is just a few words and there is certainly more that might be considered. 

The Christian will find the following Scriptures to consider: 

1Co 7:2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 

1 Co 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

1Co 7:27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. 28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.

Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 

Tit 2:4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 

Easton dictionary says, “Our Lord corrected many false notions then existing on the subject of marriage (Matt 22:23-30), and placed it as a divine institution on the highest grounds. The apostles state clearly and enforce the nuptial duties of husband and wife (Eph 5:22-33; Col 3:18, Col 3:19; 1Pet 3:1-7). Marriage is said to be “honourable” (Heb 13:4), and the prohibition of it is noted as one of the marks of degenerate times (1Tim 4:3).” 

All Christians should view Scripture as showing the standard whereby we are to live our lives, and the Scripture gives guides for selecting the elder or deacon, they especially to be examples to the believers, as far as they obey the Scriptures. 

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 

1 Timothy 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 

Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. 

There is a need to show fitness to lead in the church, and indication of that is drawn from how the family is ruled. Also, the words “one wife” show the practice of some that require the unmarried to be rulers to be a false practice. Myself, for the office, I think a single man, never having been married, and never having children needs to be looked at more seriously to see if such a one is qualified for the office, for a single man can be a fine man, godly, and obedient to the truth but still he has not learned how to rule his family for he has not gained a wife or children. It must be admitted, the family life (1 Tim 3:2, 4-5, 12; Tit 1:6) is mentioned various times, as a test for being qualified for the office. In any case, the men are to be blameless in their lives and obedient unto the faith. 

Polygamy is not to be part of the behavior, polygamy, having more than one wife at once, is generally recognized as not acceptable among men, but was a practice of some even in the time Christ tabernacled. 

Divorce. Those that suffer through such a thing should not be looked at with superstition by other Christians, and should not be judged as disqualified as an example of a believer, or that they were not to be an example for others of faith to follow, and certainly should not be judged as if they were no follower of Christ. When such a terrible thing as divorce comes about, we ought to reckon the Christian involved as being faithful in how they handled the matter and not automatically count them as acting frivolous. If such a one is divorced and would marry again, they are qualified to be considered for ministry, serving the Lord. Such a one as has been put away is free to marry and the new marriage has the blessing of God and the man and wife are qualified for the work of ministry.

Proverbs 13:15 Good understanding giveth favour: but the way of transgressors is hard. 

Myself, I understand the Bible does not make divorce an option for the believer, except in a very limited scope. Also, if a believer is married to an unbeliever, that is not reason for the believer to divorce their spouse, and at the same time, if the unbeliever would abandon and divorce their believing spouse, that is not reason for a church to stigmatize the believer that was abandoned and divorced by the unbelieving spouse. This article spells out some of what I find the Bible has to say on the subject of divorce and marriage, and with that it is understood that a believer is not to use divorce except in the case of open and clear gross sin on the part of their spouse, as shown by Scripture. Also, a believer that has been abandoned by the unbeliever is not forced to live a life of celibacy and loneliness. If any were to abide by the Scriptures, they would not be unjustly partaking in a second or third or forth marriage. Divorce for any reason other than allowed by Scripture is wicked, and the reasons allowed by Scripture should be clearly seen, the church being permitted previously to be involved before that would be accomplished. There is gravity placed on divorce in the Bible. Let the Bible, and not tradition and superstition, guide the church. In Malachi, the reason for the divorce is shown as being treacherous and abominable, the cause for the divorce being unjust. It should be considered, Ezra and Nehemiah demanded divorce under certain situations. Divorce for just cause is not hated. God divorced Israel, but unjust cause is to be abhorred and is wicked. It was not divorce for just cause, but instead treacherous and abominable putting away of a spouse that is said to be hated, in Malachi (Malachi 2:11-16). It does seem right that some things, such as adultery, divorce, and murder should be considered above others, and with that said, recall that God divorced Israel, and Ezra and Nehemiah demanded divorce. Also consider the actions of David, as he committed adultery with Bathsheba, then murdered her husband. It should be hoped that God, and a man after God’s own heart, would be accepted in the contemporary church.

It seems unreasonable to me, to always look suspiciously at one simply because they have been divorced. What a pity when those that would live the Christian life orderly and decently and that know the difference between right and wrong are judged falsely by those not sharing the facts (Prov 18:13). 

Proverbs 4:19 The way of the wicked is as darkness: they know not at what they stumble. 

Pro 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. 

2 Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 

Ephesians 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. 

Proverbs 3:3 Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart: 4 So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man. 

Divorce And Marriage Examined

The divorce marriage issue is a difficult matter, but I don't think it is difficult because the Scriptures are not clear. The things written are understood by including Deuteronomy 24:1-2, 1Corinthians 7:15, realizing a former spouse is just that, a former spouse and not a current, not a present spouse.

What Would You Do?

A couple had been members of the church where you are, and have been faithful members for a number of years. But, the husband strays, deserts his wife and divorces her, not caring if any see, and not caring at all about what the church would say. The man deserts the wife. The wife holds out and would put it all behind, but the husband gets a divorce. The divorce is final, and the man is now her former husband.

What would you do as a member of the church? Would you put the woman out of your church since she has been divorced? 

Some ostracize one that has been deserted and divorced. Some by their superstitious actions have forced the victim of divorce out of their church.

If you do not agree with putting her out of the church, would you consider the actions of those that would put her out of the church to be people that are steeped in heretical superstition and the traditions of men? I would.

Would you allow her to remain a member but not allow her to have any part with any visible ministry such as Sunday School worker, nursery, visitation, music, or the like?

If you do not agree with those that would treat her in such a way, would you consider the actions of those that would do such a thing to be people that are steeped in heretical superstition and the traditions of men? I would.

If you would allow her to remain in your church, would you continue to take her money but by your actions show you consider her to be tainted since she is divorced?

What if a woman in such a case came to your church wanting to be a member? Would you proudly send her on her way as you want no divorced person to taint you and your work?

If you would receive her as a new member would you see her as tainted and only good for putting money in your collection plate?

Would you take the children of the woman and continue "ministering" to the children and by your actions and words teach them their Mother was unclean and not fit to be seen as an accepted part of the church? If you do not agree with those that would treat her in such a way, would you consider the actions of those that would do such a thing to be people that are steeped in heretical superstition and the traditions of men? I would.

And how would you in your church treat the man and his wife that have been obedient to the word of God on these matters, and have married after one or the other have been divorced? Would you by your superstitions treat them as outcasts except when it came to take their money for your offering? Would you exclude them from ministry to others? Is obedience to the word of God a reason for the churches to treat those obedient to the precepts as if they were tainted?

Some hold different understanding than mine on this matter. These various questions are for them. If you really believe they are at fault for having married after divorce then you must believe they are guilty of committing adultery. Of coarse, you would be wrong but your superstition allows you much leeway regarding such matters, but the Bible would not support you regardless of how you thumped that grand old Book or however much you boasted of your supposed authority and position in the church. If you see them as tainted, why allow them in your church if you honestly believe they are wrong? Are you interested in their money or do you think to win them over to your superstitions?

Just wondering.

For those that would consider my understanding to be evidence I do not love the Lord and the church, you are welcomed to be wrong. But you really don't need my permission for that.

The Bible, that grand old Book, is my resting place and what I seek to finally agree with. I don't like being thought of as a harsh person or firestorm starter. There is times I simply suspend judgement on some things and others that I must go the way I understand the Bible. This matter is one that is of great importance.

A little about myself, I have been married about 35 years as of 2005, my first wife and the one that has put up with me through thick and thin. I truly do hate divorce and go so far as saying that even the attitude and thoughts some married men might have from time to time, their thinking it might be grand not to have married or to no longer be married is a wrong way to think. 

As far as the way some are treated that have been the victim of divorce, I have never gone through such a thing and would not pretend to understand. I have observed some that have been victims of divorce being treated as if they were tainted, second class. 

Here is a passage of Scripture for the reader to consider. See what this passage clearly has to say:

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.

The Bible shows God approved the marriage, for she was no longer bound to her former husband, being divorced, complete dissolution from her former spouse and not merely separation. This is the plain sense of the passage as I understand it. The teaching that there is one flesh till death parts them is one of the things that I believe causes many to stumble over this matter. Till death parts them was original intent, but adultery was not part of the original intent, and neither was desertion part of the original intent or other manner of wickedness. The divorce and remarriage is protection for the victim. As some would have it, a twenty year old that was married one month when their spouse ran off divorced and remarried or other manner of evil would be demanded to remain single. That is not at all what the word of God demands. The divorce and remarriage law is a protection because of the hardness of heart of a spouse that would commit adultery, desertion and all manner of evil. 

... she may go and be another man's wife.

With Deuteronomy 24:1-2 I see that the woman was granted a bill of divorce, not a result of her moral failure. If what is meant by uncleanness discovered by her husband, if she had committed adultery she should have been stoned as prescribed by the law, not divorced. It is very likely her husband simply was not pleased with her so a result of his hardness of heart he put her away (Tit 1:15), thus the bill of divorcement. This is the hard heartedness spoken of, the reason for the law being used to protect the spouse that is put away.

Titus 1:15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

The bill of divorcement was evidence she had not committed adultery, and so she was free to marry again. The failure was on the part of her husband. The hardness of heart divorce mentioned by our Lord is seen here. If she had committed adultery there would be no bill of divorcement. The word of God says she was free to marry again, and so the new marriage would not result in adultery. 

Do you think God was approving adultery when God said let her marry again? I do not understand these passages to excuse adultery or result in adultery should the one that has been put away marry again.

The Bible shows God approved the marriage, for she was no longer bound to her former husband. Is the plain sense of this passage not the truth? I believe the Scriptures (John 17:17). 

... she may go and be another man's wife.

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

I hate divorce and I also believe the Bible is against unjust divorce. But I also believe God will do right. As I said previous, the grand old Book comes first. I hope that we both would cast aside our own opinions and experience if it were revealed we have been wrong. I hope that we both would not conform and agree with one another when in our mind we were not convinced of the certainty of the matter. 

Take the clear language of Scripture, and if you are not certain, do not think to bind another by your lack of understanding. 

Some have established themselves, and not clear language of Scripture, as the ideal regarding spiritual matters. These matters have potential of having great impact on peoples lives. Forbidding to marry, demanding an ascetic life of abstinence as regards intimate relations is not what the word of God demands of a twenty year old or any other person that has been divorced, because their spouse deserted them, divorced them so they are the former spouse. God does not demand such a thing in His word.

Those that claim Moses to be simply a man and with that have claimed the Bible as it is written is false, all the while lifting themselves up as the ideal, the standard, encourage bondage of the tender child of God; and the Bible does not agree with what they are doing. Be aware of Mark 7:9, 13; Col 2:8 

Mark 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Regarding Deuteronomy 24:1-4, I am not of the understanding that Moses gave an unlawful command here. I do not believe that God left adultery be part of the life of the people of God for the thousands of years the law as shown in Deuteronomy 24:2 has been in effect, and I do not see that law as an unlawful command.

I do not see that law as an unlawful command. Neither do I understand the law to have been rescinded, but rather, as it is written, Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets” (Matt 5:17). No, it is not revealed to me that our Lord has said the law of Moses was not lawful. Various men have said as much, but I reject those that would reject the clear language of the Bible and I stand opposed to them.

The guilty person in the divorce is not given ease by the law, and the innocent is not to be treated as if they were guilty. The law protects the innocent person.

Gen 18:25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

There is much argument by some the wife as described by Deuteronomy 24:1-2 had some serious fault, but I find the fault with the one putting her away, for the word declares the wife could marry again. I think it is significant the term hardness of heart is used (Matt 19:8) regarding the putting away described, evidently, in Deuteronomy 24:1-2, for a believer is said to have a new heart, the stony heart being taken away and they are given a heart of flesh (Eze 11:19; 36:26; John 3:7). The wife that is put away is not under bondage, is not bound to one that would treat them cruelly in this manner.

It must be understood, one answers ultimately to the Lord alone on these things. Many have declared they forbid divorce, they forbid dissolution, and forbid to marry, making no distinction about why there was a divorce. That ought not be (Gen 18:25). I say that a person is not obligated to a person that claims to speak for God, especially while what is being said is contrary to the testimony of Scripture. “They the truth with superstitions and traditions taint.” We have no apostles now such as the twelve, but we have the written word of God (1Thes 5:21; Acts 17:11; Rom 12:2; Eph 5:10; Phil 1:10; 1Joh 4:1; Rev 2:2).

As far as I know, in most states it is the two people being married that need a license, while the one that would officiate, sign the license and mail it in does not need a license. One is not bound to any that would indiscriminately forbid marriage. One is not bound to such a one as regards the church they attend. Some have by fiat declared that if they are not submitted to and if any do not agree with them and be a member of their church or a church they would approve, such a person is following another god and likely is not saved. The one speaking in such a way is elect they say, so they must be right. They love to have the preeminence.

It is the faithful Christian that is liable to be deserted and abused by their unsaved, unbelieving spouse. The one that would do right is likely to be one that finds trouble from their spouse if and when their spouse wants them to agree with wicked works. Why then is it the Christians that then turn on the one that has already been abused by the caprice of their former spouse, or otherwise suffered the trauma of divorce. 

As I understand the matter, the law is for the relief of the victim of the one that was hard hearted. The law was not simply for the pleasure of the hard hearted spouse. God cares for His children and has not called them to bondage or abuse at the hand of the hard hearted. God has not demanded of his children bondage as a result of one that has deserted them (Deut 24:1-2; 1Cor 7:15).

I had rather agree with the Bible as I understand that Book, than to have the praise and approval of various preachers, especially when those preachers are not proven to be of complete understanding of all matters. As believers we are to prove all things, search the Scriptures to see whether the things said are so or not (1Thes 5:21; Acts 17:11; Rom 12:2; Eph 5:10; Phil 1:10; 1Joh 4:1; Rev 2:2). The Bible is the final authority, and not men.

Further, as I count that law a lawful command, it is shown that under the old law it was said to be hard and terrible (Heb 12:18-21), yet the law gave God's tender children relief from the hard hearted ones, but now, under the new, there are those not by the commandment of God but instead by their own traditions and commandments, that insist God's own dear children are expected to be in bondage at the wicked pleasure of hard hearted vile scoundrels. There are those that teach as if our Lord rescinded the law as shown in Deuteronomy 24:1-2, but that is not the case (Matt 5:17). Dear brethren I simply do not accept such teaching and I think it is hurtful and cruel, after the commandments and traditions of men, to insist the tender children of God be put under bondage of wicked persons, wicked persons that are not even present with them.

I reject what is said by some about one flesh till death part them. That about one flesh till death us do part is a teaching of the eminent Augustine. If you would follow Augustine would you also follow Origen? Further, divorce in the Bible is shown to be dissolution and not simply separation. God divorced Israel (Jer 3:8; 6:8; Ezek 23:11). I say again, God divorced Israel. Will any exclude God and say that God is unjust and has done something unlawful, or will any say the word of God does not mean what it says, it is error, as some do already with the law of Moses? 

It seems to me the traditions and commandments of men have been used to put God's tender children in bondage to wicked hard hearted villains. How hard it is for prejudice and superstition to be released. How hard the heart is that demands God's tender children remain in bondage, when the word of God evidently gives a path of freedom from bondage. 

. . . she may go and be another man's wife.

If a person has been married, but then their spouse turns and commits all manner of filthiness, the innocent spouse does not need to be forgiven. It is a sorry thing that superstition, prejudice and tradition has brought this to the place where an innocent victim of divorce is treated as a second class person and is told, "Just be faithful, and God will forgive you after time passes. You are forbidden to marry again but just be faithful. You are no longer accepted as other members are in the church, but just be faithful and give your money but don’t expect a place in church ministry." That is something that is usual in cases of divorce. Mark this, the guilty person in the divorce is not served by the law to give them ease, and the innocent is not to be treated as if they were guilty. 

Gen 18:25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

Some think their long experience makes there understanding of these things to be correct. There are those elders that pretend, since Christ is the Head of the church, and since they have been appointed by divine providence an elder, that they are to be followed, as if they make no mistake since Christ has seen to it that they were appointed, and Christ makes no mistake. They are the pastor and you must submit to them for they are in their position by divine appointment. But consider this carefully and consider what you have been taught, proving all things by the language of Scripture. Being an elder does not make one inerrant and infallible. Long experience does not equal inerrant infallible understanding. The Scriptures are the authoritative word each believer is bound to, and their is but one mediator (1Tim 2:5; 1Thes 5:21; Acts 17:11; Rom 12:2; Eph 5:10; Phil 1:10; 1Joh 4:1; Rev 2:2). Some have complained saying the passages of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 are error, not approved by our Lord. They say the Bible is wrong and boldly declare their own understanding is correct. Such thoughts are sinful and cause much harm. Any with such an understanding need to turn from such a thing and believe the Bible. 

Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

The charge has been made by some that Moses was a mere man that gave law contrary to what God would have had him do. The question for us to answer, is if the law was lawful. Are we to believe the Bible is a rule for faith and practice, and are we to believe our Bible is inerrant and infallible? I say yes, we are to trust the Bible. If that law is not lawful our Lord left it stand for thousands of years without making a correction and if that law is not lawful adultery has been shown to be approved for that law from Deuteronomy 24:1-2 allows divorce and remarriage; and further, to this day that law has not been rescinded. The law was lawful, and is lawful (Matt 5:17). 

Those that claim the Bible nowhere allows divorce and then marriage simply is not in agreement with what the Bible says. It is terrible that by tradition some would put a dear child of God in bondage forced to stay single because their spouse by caprice deserts, divorces, and sometimes marries another or takes to some other open sin. It is by the traditions and commands of men, superstition, and not God, perpetuated so they would put a person that has been put away in bondage, bound to a spouse that will not have them, that has chosen instead to live in sin. Now such ones are welcomed to be wrong, and they may keep that false understanding but the tender hearted child of God (Eze 11:19; 36:26) is not intended to be in bondage to a hard hearted abusive villain (1Co 7:15; Deut 24:2).

Historic is not always popular. For example, the word superstition. Some let it be known they do not like their beliefs to be called superstition. 

From Webster's 1828, SUPERSTI'TION, n. L. superstitio, supersto; super and sto, to stand.. 1. Excessive exactness or rigor in religious opinions or practice; extreme and unnecessary scruples in the observance of religious rites not commanded, or of points of minor importance; excess or extravagance in religion; the doing of things not required by God, or abstaining from things not forbidden; or the belief of what is absurd, or belief without evidence. Superstition has reference to god, to religion, or to beings superior to man. 2. False religion; false worship. 3. Rite or practice proceeding from excess of scruples in religion. In this sense, it admits of a plural. They the truth With superstitions and traditions taint. 4. Excessive nicety; scrupulous exactness. 5. Belief in the direct agency of superior powers in certain extraordinary or singular events, or in omens and prognostics. 

That definition shows my use of the word as appropriate to describe the no divorce no marriage based on my understanding of the Bible. There is another word men do not like to have applied to their teaching and beliefs, and that word is heresy. When any man goes contrary to Scripture in their teaching that teaching is heresy. 

There is much history to forbid the marriage of a divorced person, but all I see is that the history comes from men leaving off what the Scriptures have to say (Mark 7:9, 13; Col 2:8). There is clear Scripture, as I see it, that allows marriage for the one that has a former spouse, a divorced person.

Regarding taking a new wife after divorce, the Scriptures allow that. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is not error, as some men claim, and as others claim, the passages are to be explained away so that the words "go and be another man's wife" actually is to be understood as never marry. The word "former" is to be explained as meaning present, current. The opposite view would be contrary to my understanding of Scripture, therefore would be considered as heresy and superstition. 

As well, forbidding to marry is shown among the doctrines of devils (1Tim 4:1). How ever popular such teaching is that forbids to marry, it needs to be explained that forbidding to marry is shown as doctrines of devils, so care must be taken (1John 4:1). If a person would forbid to marry they need to speak as the Scripture speaks (1Pet 4:11). Some have said they will allow no exceptions as they forbid to marry, but then they depart from the Scriptures and introduce their own commandments. 

This is a very important matter and they very much impact the persons involved. It is mentioned that the original intent was never divorce, but there is something else that needs to be seen, and that is in Genesis 2:18 where another original intent is shown. Also adultery, desertion and such like were never of the original intent. This law allowing to marry after divorce is for the protection of the child of God in such cases. 

I am not demanding that all single must marry now, not at all. I do not see any call to fault a person that is single, but I do find fault that forbids marriage where the Bible allows it. The Roman Catholic priests do not marry but they go that way according to their choice. Regarding forbidding to marry because of different race alone, and forbidding to marry based on having been divorced, the Scriptures do not demand that, how ever much it is forced and how ever scholarly and compelling the pleading is about forbidding to marry. With this, I simply find no reason to support or validate those that would propagate teaching regarding these two instances of forbidding to marry. That very well may leave off many churches, and some seem to think it really doesn't matter if another goes a different direction with these, plus many seem to keep their stand to themselves till a person that has been hurt comes across their path, then they make these demands, or till those of the wrong race come by their path. The Bible allows them and men's excess of scruples in religion forbid it (Acts 17:22; Eccl 7:16). The ramification of these matters is great. The celibate life, abstention, demanded by forbidding to marry when one would otherwise marry is not called for. When one argues that one or the other, being married or not being married, is not better than the other but then demands no marriage and says that is obedience, when the Scriptures allow marriage, there is very much harm caused. 

My words have been plain and I have made it clear I find various teaching regarding these particular matters to be harmful and contrary to Scripture. Being over nice regarding various views is not an evidence of being convinced one way or the other. Some matters are more important than others. I do not see this as an unimportant matter as many seem to, that claim to hold views similar to mine. It seems strange to me that any believer would object to making it clear these things are counted as important. To simply act as if the difference is of no consequence, exhibiting excessive nicety, is validation of a heretical view as much as it is for the true. With this being said, I leave the reader to decide for themselves about these things.

Forbidding To Marry

There are two areas that have been popular for men to forbid marriage. Both are shown to be listed as doctrines of devils. The first area where men forbid marriage is when those of a different race would marry. There is nothing in Scripture to forbid marriage based on race alone. We all are of Adams race. 

Luke 2:10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

The second area is when one has divorced, certain men forbid marriage for the divorced person. Where God allows marriage, men instead perpetuate doctrines of devils, forbidding to marry (1Tim 4:1-5).

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

These sort of beliefs ought to be disclosed openly so a person would know what sort of church a person would fellowship with. These sort of things ought not be portrayed as insignificant, inconsequential matters. These persons that would forbid marriage where the Bible allows it need to be identified and if they think their views are so innocuous they should have no problem openly making them clear when the statement of faith for the church is shown.

Various Passages Concerning Marriage And Divorce

Matthew 5:27-32

Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
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.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
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.

The one with the hard heart will not regard these passages, and will put away their wife, with the hardness of heart divorce. The term put away means a complete severing, as if death had separated them. Compare Titus 1:15, Deuteronomy 24:1-2; and 1Corinthians 7:15.

Titus 1:15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.

1 Corinthians 7:15 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.

Matthew 19:3-9

Matthew 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 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?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
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.
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.

Again, as mentioned previous, the one with the hard heart will not regard this. The believer is not to put away their spouse, but one with a hard heart, an unbeliever will. When one puts away their spouse in such a manner, they show themselves to be an unbeliever, irrespective of what their mouth says. Sin is characterized as spiritual fornication, as shown with Hos 2:2, 5; Jer 2:20, 35; 3:9; 13:27; Eze 20:30; Rev 17:4. When the one with the hard heart puts away their spouse, there is seen spiritual fornication, and the spouse that has been put away is free, not in bondage, not bound to their former spouse in such a case. The believer could see all the evil that would follow and would have no excuse for doing such a thing to their spouse. If a believer were to put away their wife in such a case, everywhere men would testify the wife had committed adultery, and as that would not be the case it would be of the cruelest sort of thing to cause to happen. Neither spouse could marry another in such a case, but by the evidence seen regarding the one that put away their spouse in such a case they show themselves to be an unbeliever (1Cor 7:15; Deut 24:1-2). There is no exception to what is said in Matthew 19:9, those words stand firm, but there is a different case and that is shown in Deuteronomy 24:1-2. 

I believe when one that claims to be a believer deserts their spouse, they by their actions show themselves to be a hard hearted unbeliever. The Lord knows their heart but we see the fruit. However much a parrot would quack like a duck, they still are a parrot. The Lord knows what they are. If they appear by their actions to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing, we ought to regard them as such (2Tim 2:19; Matt 7:15). We see the outside, but the Lord looks on the heart. The believer need not be bound by one that quacks like a duck, but otherwise looks and acts like a parrot.

If a husband deserts their wife and divorces them, while the husband claims to be a believer, what is one to make of that (1Cor 7:2-5; Matt 19:9)? The word is clear enough, that a believer is never to put away their spouse except for the cause of fornication. It is written, 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). Such an action would be terrible cruelty toward ones wife. If the husband would refuse to reconcile, the wife could reasonably understand their husband to be an unbeliever, and so be free.

Deuteronomy 24:1-2 gives explanation to such a case. When one puts away their spouse, while declaring their spouse has not committed fornication, they have declared themselves the guilty party, and that is how it is with Deuteronomy 24:1-2. With the hardness of heart divorce (Deut 24:1-2) the husband in actuality declared their wife was not the guilty one. That is why the wife could go and marry again, with God’s blessing. If the husband would be confounded about that and not understand, that would only show further evidence of their own hard heart. The hard hearted is not subject to the commands of our Lord, and the unbeliever cannot please God (Rom 8:7-9). Such a person must be born again (John 3:7; Eze 11:19; 36:26).

The believer is not to put away their spouse for the reason of their spouse being an unbeliever (1Cor 7:12-13). If one is holding some gross sin, that should be shown. One is not given leeway to put away a spouse for frivolous cause. What could reasonably (to a reasonable person) be shown to be frivolous is not excuse for putting a spouse away, and would show the one putting their spouse away to be bearing fruits of an unbeliever (Gal 5:19-21). 

A believer is not to continue in sin. After what seems reasonable time to the deserted spouse, the mandate of Scripture would allow them to be free.

Mark 10:2-12

Mark 10:2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

For the hardness of heart, in unbelief, one puts away their spouse. The original intent of marriage is shown, but take notice, hardness of heart, desertion, adultery and fornication were not part of the original intent. Moses wrote Deuteronomy 24:1-2 to protect the spouse unjustly put away and cruelly treated, and that is a lawful law, having the authority and blessing of God (Matt 5:17). 

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.

Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Romans 7:1-4

Romans 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

Those Paul first addressed with these words knew the law, and they knew Deuteronomy 24:1-2 was law. These verse speak specifically to those that are married and not to those that have a former spouse, former, because of being put away, divorced. The law granted complete dissolution from the spouse so that when there was divorce there was complete severing, complete dissolution and not simply separation. These passages in Romans 7:1-4 speak to those that are presently married and not to those with a former spouse. The one that would leave a husband and marry another as described in Romans 7:3 would be committing adultery, but they would also be committing Polygamy. Believers are told to be married to one spouse, not more than one (1Tim 3:2; Tit 1:16; Matt 19:4; Gen 2:18, 22). Some pretend one that has been divorced is still married, and so if the one that has been divorced would marry another after their divorce they claim they are married to two at once, but this is not so. Divorce severs the bond (Mark 10:8), being put away resulting in dissolution, complete dissolution and not simply separation. The one that marries after a divorce is married to one wife, one spouse, as the one that has been widowed and married again is the husband of one wife. There is a superstition that says a divorced man is not qualified for ministry, but such a belief is just that, superstition.

1 Corinthians 7:10-14

1Corinthians 7:10 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.
12 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.

To the believer these words are clear enough. That all these passages dealing with marriage and divorce are heaped in controversy is also to be noted. When a spouse is deserted, cruelly treated by their mate, a mate that would put them away out of hardness of heart and unbelief, if they would leave, let them leave and let the believing one know they are not under bondage in such a case, and when they have been divorced they are not bound to their former spouse but are free. The term in the Bible, used to describe divorce, such as put away, means a complete severing, a complete dissolution, and not simply a separation. The original intent was till death do part, but sin has entered in and now there is hardness of heart, desertion, adultery, fornication and all manner of evil cruelty. If the unbeliever depart let them depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

1 Corinthians 7:15 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.

Approach these things with prayer and fasting is my advice. Be serious minded. We are not to look for excuses, loopholes, to allow our having a way to accommodate hardness of heart or frivolous minds regarding our Lord or marriage, and we have no excuse for our own hardness of heart toward one that is divorced or divorced and married again. The believer has been given a new heart and is told to put off the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts (Eph 4:22-24).

Ephesians 4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

A message of comfort from the Scriptures,
that we through patience and comfort 
of the scriptures might have hope.

Come and hear, all ye that fear God,
and I will declare what he hath done for my soul.
Psalms 66:16

[ Home Page ] [ Main Menu ]

Bob Krajcik
[ Bible Study Letters ]
 Your Comments Welcomed
Your Privacy Respected
Send Your Comments, Questions,
Praise Reports or Prayer Requests

[ Top of Page ]