DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE---
What Does The Bible Really Say?
Harry Bethel
BethelMinistries.com
(NOTE: The truths from the Scriptures presented in this article will be new to you, and astonishing. This article has been read by many thousands and not one has refuted anything herein. I encourage you to allow the Holy Spirit to open your eyes to see these very important truths about divorce and remarriage.)
There is probably no doctrine more misunderstood among conservative Christians than the one concerning divorce and remarriage. Conservatism in biblical interpretation is, for the most part, a safe camp to be in. But just because one embraces a conservative view of a particular doctrine does not necessarily mean one holds a scriptural view.
Christians should not divorce their marriage partners.
Forgiveness is the best and right way to handle infractions of the marriage covenant or relationship.
Husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it. Wives should love and submit to their husbands in everything as unto the Lord. If these two commands were obeyed, divorce would be virtually non-existent among Christians.
But what do we do, for example, about Christians who are divorced and their ex-spouse has remarried? May that one marry another person? This and many other questions concerning this issue are clearly answered from the Word of God in this treatise.
What you are about to discover (whether you accept these truths or not) is a literal view, and more importantly a scriptural view and indeed the truth concerning divorce and remarriage.
To help you to grasp the truths of this teaching, some basic points in a question-and-answer format will be presented. May the Lord do for you what He did for the disciples---"Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures" (Lk. 24:45). I encourage you to be like the Bereans and search the Scriptures to see if these things are true.
Because many of these truths from the Scriptures are based on sequentially presented facts, it is important to read the following questions and answers without skipping any of them.
Does God recognize divorce, or is a marriage indissoluble?
A marriage can be dissolved by divorce, and God does recognize this fact. God Himself put away Israel and gave her a bill of divorce. God said, "And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce" (Jer. 3:8). Indeed, God Himself is a divorcé (masculine is divorcé, feminine is divorcee).
What about the teaching that two people who are legitimately married are one flesh and God says man cannot put the marriage asunder?
A marriage can indeed be put asunder. The Scriptures do not say that man cannot put asunder what God has joined together, but rather "let not" man put it asunder (Mt. 19:6). Is God forbidding people to do that which is impossible to do?
No.
But isn't a marriage still binding even if a couple gets a divorce? Aren't they still husband and wife in God's eyes?
No. God put away Israel and gave her a bill of divorce (Jer. 3:8), and in Hosea's relationship with Gomer (which is analogous to God's relationship with Israel) God had recorded in Hosea 2:2, "She is not my wife, neither am I her husband."
Doesn't the Bible say that God hates divorce?
No. Notwithstanding the fact that some modern translations say God hates divorce in Malachi 2:16, that is a mistranslation. What the Hebrew text really says is that God hates "putting away" (Mal. 2:16 KJV), "sending away" (Young's Literal Translation).
God did not say He hates divorce. God hates putting away. Giving a certificate of divorce so that the one put away may remarry without being in an adulterous relationship was a merciful act allowed by God.
Is there a difference between "putting away" and "divorce"?
Yes. One can put away or send out his or her spouse without giving a bill of divorce. Deuteronomy 24:1-3 and Jeremiah 3:8 speak of giving a bill of divorcement and sending out of the house or putting away. Some wrongly claim that "putting away" and "divorce" are synonymous, but the fact that a wife can be put away without having been given a bill of divorcement clearly refutes that false teaching. There are many wives who are legally separated from their husbands, but are not divorced.
But doesn't putting away and divorce really mean the same thing?
No. Putting away is because of sin and giving the bill of divorcement is a merciful act allowed by God to dissolve the marriage so that the ex-spouse is free to marry another person. In Moses' day it was a very burdensome thing for a woman to be put away without being given a bill of divorcement so that she could marry another man. God made a provision for women who were put away so that they could be supported. It was because of men's hard hearts (Mt. 19:8) that God, through Moses, allowed men to put away their wives. And it was God's mercy that provided for a man to give a bill of divorcement so that "she may go and be another man's wife" (Deut. 24:1-2).
Notice in Deuteronomy 24:4 that the Scriptures refer to "her former husband." Her first husband is no longer her husband, he is her former or ex-husband. The first marriage has been absolutely dissolved. Otherwise the divorced woman would be in adultery if she became another man's wife.
What if a divorced woman's second husband dies or gives her a bill of divorcement and sends her out, may she return to her former husband who divorced her?
No. Her former husband may not take her again to be his wife. "And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin" (Deut. 24:3-4).
If marriage was indissoluble then she would be able to return to her first husband because they would still be one flesh. But she is no longer married to her first or "former" husband. He "may not take her again to be his wife."
Marriage is a sacred institution. God never intended for a man and wife to divorce for any and every reason. A man should not frivolously divorce his wife. If she marries another man he may not take her back for any reason. This command of God is not only given in the Old Covenant, but also in the New.
The Lord commanded, "Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband" (1 Cor. 7:11). She must remain unmarried. The clear implication here is that if she does not remain unmarried and marries another man, then she cannot be reconciled to her former husband because this is still an abomination to God.
If a woman divorces her husband and she becomes another man's wife, she may not return to him, according to the command of God.
It should be noted here, that, while God allowed men to divorce their wives in the Old Testament because of their hard hearts, nowhere in the entire Bible is a woman allowed to divorce her husband.
What about the fact that the Bible says in Matthew 5:32 that whosoever marries her that is divorced commits adultery?
That is what the King James Version and several modern translations say. But a closer look at the Greek text shows that a literal translation in that verse would be "whosoever shall marry her that is put away commits adultery."
The Greek word apoluo, Strong's number 630, is used here and for some reason was translated "divorced" instead of "put away." The King James translators were not consistent in translating apoluo "put away" or "send away" or "sent away" as they did more than 25 times in other verses. In fact, apoluo appears in the Greek Textus Receptus (from which the King James Version was translated) more than 65 times but was translated "divorce" only once, and that was in Matthew 5:32.
The Greek word apoluo was correctly translated "put away" in Matthew 5:32, for example, in the American Standard Version (1901), Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible (1898), and The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament translated by Jay P. Green. A margin note in The Geneva Bible translated from the Textus Receptus in 1560 (about 50 years before the KJV) concerning the term put away said, "that is, was not lawfully divorced."
Jesus did not say whosoever shall marry her that has been given a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) commits adultery, but rather whosoever shall marry her that has been put away (apoluo, 630) commits adultery (Mt. 5:32; 19:9; Lk. 16:18).
Likewise, Jesus did not say whosoever shall give a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) to his wife causes her to commit adultery, but rather whosoever shall put away (apoluo, 630) his wife (except for fornication) causes her to commit adultery (Mt. 5:32).
And Jesus did not say whosoever shall give his wife a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) and marry another commits adultery, but rather whosoever shall put away (apoluo, 630) his wife (except for fornication) and shall marry another commits adultery (Mt. 19:9; Lk. 16:18).
And Jesus did not say if a woman shall give her husband a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) and be married to another she commits adultery, but rather if a woman shall put away (apoluo, 630) her husband and be married to another she commits adultery (Mk. 10:12).
Why in all these cases would the parties be guilty of adultery? Because they would have only been put away or separated, they would not have been divorced. They would still be married, therefore they would be committing adultery.
A man who no longer has a wife cannot be guilty of adultery by marrying a woman who does not have a husband. Conversely, a woman who no longer has a husband cannot be guilty of adultery by marrying a man who does not have a wife.
If one marries a woman who is merely put away without having been given a certificate of divorce, that is an adulterous situation because she is still married to the man from whom she has been separated. But if she has been given a certificate of divorce, then she is not married, she no longer has a husband and as set forth early on in Deuteronomy 24, she is free to go be another man's wife.
But weren't the King James translators inspired by the Holy Spirit to produce an infallible translation which is the only English Bible that God has used to preserve His Word?
Even the King James translators themselves did not make that claim. In fact, in the preface to the 1611 version (this and the Apocrypha which they translated has been omitted from most copies of the KJV today) they clearly disclaim that their translation was the only Word of God. There were already several English translations in existence and being used in England, America, and other countries. Some of these were Wycliffe (1380), Tyndale (1525-30), Coverdale (1535), Matthew's Bible (1537), Great Bible (1540), Geneva Bible (1560), and Bishop's Bible (1568).
In the preface titled The Translators To The Reader was written, "...We do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest [most common, lowest quality] translation of the Bible in English...containeth the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God." "...We are so far off from condemning any of their labors that prevailed before us [previous translators of previous versions] in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea...that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance." "Truly (good Christian reader) we never thought from the beginning that we should need to make a new translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one...but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principle good one..."
The 1611 original had numerous margin notes that offer different possible translations of words and phrases.
The translators wrote in the preface, "Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, less the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be so sound in this point...It hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness...Variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded." "...We have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done...Why should we be in bondage to them [words or syllables] if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?...We have...avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans..."
Wouldn't the teaching that a divorced person is free to marry again give license to widespread sin?
No more than what Jesus taught concerning forgiving a brother who sins against you. Jesus said to forgive not just seven times as Peter suggested, but seventy times seven. Does this give license for brothers to sin against you? No. God, when He deems it necessary, will chasten one of His own for sinning (Heb. 12:6-11).
Christians should never divorce their marriage partners. Forgiveness is God's desire. Anyone who divorces their spouse will have to account to God for it.
Anyone who marries a person who has only been put away without a certificate of divorce commits adultery and will have to account to God for that.
Anyone who is lawfully divorced may remarry, but whoever divorces their spouse in order to marry another will have to account to God.
The whole tenor of the New Testament is forgiving those who sin against you.
Husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it. Wives should not only love their husbands but submit to them in everything as unto the Lord.
The head of man is Christ, and the head of woman is man, not Christ (1 Cor. 11:3).
The Lord commands a woman to not depart (chorizo, 5563) from her husband. But if she does depart (chorizo, 5563) she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And the husband should not put away (aphiemi, 863) his wife (1 Cor. 7:10-11).
next pages
What Does The Bible Really Say?
Harry Bethel
BethelMinistries.com
(NOTE: The truths from the Scriptures presented in this article will be new to you, and astonishing. This article has been read by many thousands and not one has refuted anything herein. I encourage you to allow the Holy Spirit to open your eyes to see these very important truths about divorce and remarriage.)
There is probably no doctrine more misunderstood among conservative Christians than the one concerning divorce and remarriage. Conservatism in biblical interpretation is, for the most part, a safe camp to be in. But just because one embraces a conservative view of a particular doctrine does not necessarily mean one holds a scriptural view.
Christians should not divorce their marriage partners.
Forgiveness is the best and right way to handle infractions of the marriage covenant or relationship.
Husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it. Wives should love and submit to their husbands in everything as unto the Lord. If these two commands were obeyed, divorce would be virtually non-existent among Christians.
But what do we do, for example, about Christians who are divorced and their ex-spouse has remarried? May that one marry another person? This and many other questions concerning this issue are clearly answered from the Word of God in this treatise.
What you are about to discover (whether you accept these truths or not) is a literal view, and more importantly a scriptural view and indeed the truth concerning divorce and remarriage.
To help you to grasp the truths of this teaching, some basic points in a question-and-answer format will be presented. May the Lord do for you what He did for the disciples---"Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures" (Lk. 24:45). I encourage you to be like the Bereans and search the Scriptures to see if these things are true.
Because many of these truths from the Scriptures are based on sequentially presented facts, it is important to read the following questions and answers without skipping any of them.
Does God recognize divorce, or is a marriage indissoluble?
A marriage can be dissolved by divorce, and God does recognize this fact. God Himself put away Israel and gave her a bill of divorce. God said, "And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce" (Jer. 3:8). Indeed, God Himself is a divorcé (masculine is divorcé, feminine is divorcee).
What about the teaching that two people who are legitimately married are one flesh and God says man cannot put the marriage asunder?
A marriage can indeed be put asunder. The Scriptures do not say that man cannot put asunder what God has joined together, but rather "let not" man put it asunder (Mt. 19:6). Is God forbidding people to do that which is impossible to do?
No.
But isn't a marriage still binding even if a couple gets a divorce? Aren't they still husband and wife in God's eyes?
No. God put away Israel and gave her a bill of divorce (Jer. 3:8), and in Hosea's relationship with Gomer (which is analogous to God's relationship with Israel) God had recorded in Hosea 2:2, "She is not my wife, neither am I her husband."
Doesn't the Bible say that God hates divorce?
No. Notwithstanding the fact that some modern translations say God hates divorce in Malachi 2:16, that is a mistranslation. What the Hebrew text really says is that God hates "putting away" (Mal. 2:16 KJV), "sending away" (Young's Literal Translation).
God did not say He hates divorce. God hates putting away. Giving a certificate of divorce so that the one put away may remarry without being in an adulterous relationship was a merciful act allowed by God.
Is there a difference between "putting away" and "divorce"?
Yes. One can put away or send out his or her spouse without giving a bill of divorce. Deuteronomy 24:1-3 and Jeremiah 3:8 speak of giving a bill of divorcement and sending out of the house or putting away. Some wrongly claim that "putting away" and "divorce" are synonymous, but the fact that a wife can be put away without having been given a bill of divorcement clearly refutes that false teaching. There are many wives who are legally separated from their husbands, but are not divorced.
But doesn't putting away and divorce really mean the same thing?
No. Putting away is because of sin and giving the bill of divorcement is a merciful act allowed by God to dissolve the marriage so that the ex-spouse is free to marry another person. In Moses' day it was a very burdensome thing for a woman to be put away without being given a bill of divorcement so that she could marry another man. God made a provision for women who were put away so that they could be supported. It was because of men's hard hearts (Mt. 19:8) that God, through Moses, allowed men to put away their wives. And it was God's mercy that provided for a man to give a bill of divorcement so that "she may go and be another man's wife" (Deut. 24:1-2).
Notice in Deuteronomy 24:4 that the Scriptures refer to "her former husband." Her first husband is no longer her husband, he is her former or ex-husband. The first marriage has been absolutely dissolved. Otherwise the divorced woman would be in adultery if she became another man's wife.
What if a divorced woman's second husband dies or gives her a bill of divorcement and sends her out, may she return to her former husband who divorced her?
No. Her former husband may not take her again to be his wife. "And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin" (Deut. 24:3-4).
If marriage was indissoluble then she would be able to return to her first husband because they would still be one flesh. But she is no longer married to her first or "former" husband. He "may not take her again to be his wife."
Marriage is a sacred institution. God never intended for a man and wife to divorce for any and every reason. A man should not frivolously divorce his wife. If she marries another man he may not take her back for any reason. This command of God is not only given in the Old Covenant, but also in the New.
The Lord commanded, "Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband" (1 Cor. 7:11). She must remain unmarried. The clear implication here is that if she does not remain unmarried and marries another man, then she cannot be reconciled to her former husband because this is still an abomination to God.
If a woman divorces her husband and she becomes another man's wife, she may not return to him, according to the command of God.
It should be noted here, that, while God allowed men to divorce their wives in the Old Testament because of their hard hearts, nowhere in the entire Bible is a woman allowed to divorce her husband.
What about the fact that the Bible says in Matthew 5:32 that whosoever marries her that is divorced commits adultery?
That is what the King James Version and several modern translations say. But a closer look at the Greek text shows that a literal translation in that verse would be "whosoever shall marry her that is put away commits adultery."
The Greek word apoluo, Strong's number 630, is used here and for some reason was translated "divorced" instead of "put away." The King James translators were not consistent in translating apoluo "put away" or "send away" or "sent away" as they did more than 25 times in other verses. In fact, apoluo appears in the Greek Textus Receptus (from which the King James Version was translated) more than 65 times but was translated "divorce" only once, and that was in Matthew 5:32.
The Greek word apoluo was correctly translated "put away" in Matthew 5:32, for example, in the American Standard Version (1901), Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible (1898), and The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament translated by Jay P. Green. A margin note in The Geneva Bible translated from the Textus Receptus in 1560 (about 50 years before the KJV) concerning the term put away said, "that is, was not lawfully divorced."
Jesus did not say whosoever shall marry her that has been given a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) commits adultery, but rather whosoever shall marry her that has been put away (apoluo, 630) commits adultery (Mt. 5:32; 19:9; Lk. 16:18).
Likewise, Jesus did not say whosoever shall give a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) to his wife causes her to commit adultery, but rather whosoever shall put away (apoluo, 630) his wife (except for fornication) causes her to commit adultery (Mt. 5:32).
And Jesus did not say whosoever shall give his wife a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) and marry another commits adultery, but rather whosoever shall put away (apoluo, 630) his wife (except for fornication) and shall marry another commits adultery (Mt. 19:9; Lk. 16:18).
And Jesus did not say if a woman shall give her husband a bill of divorce (biblion, 975 and apostasion, 647) and be married to another she commits adultery, but rather if a woman shall put away (apoluo, 630) her husband and be married to another she commits adultery (Mk. 10:12).
Why in all these cases would the parties be guilty of adultery? Because they would have only been put away or separated, they would not have been divorced. They would still be married, therefore they would be committing adultery.
A man who no longer has a wife cannot be guilty of adultery by marrying a woman who does not have a husband. Conversely, a woman who no longer has a husband cannot be guilty of adultery by marrying a man who does not have a wife.
If one marries a woman who is merely put away without having been given a certificate of divorce, that is an adulterous situation because she is still married to the man from whom she has been separated. But if she has been given a certificate of divorce, then she is not married, she no longer has a husband and as set forth early on in Deuteronomy 24, she is free to go be another man's wife.
But weren't the King James translators inspired by the Holy Spirit to produce an infallible translation which is the only English Bible that God has used to preserve His Word?
Even the King James translators themselves did not make that claim. In fact, in the preface to the 1611 version (this and the Apocrypha which they translated has been omitted from most copies of the KJV today) they clearly disclaim that their translation was the only Word of God. There were already several English translations in existence and being used in England, America, and other countries. Some of these were Wycliffe (1380), Tyndale (1525-30), Coverdale (1535), Matthew's Bible (1537), Great Bible (1540), Geneva Bible (1560), and Bishop's Bible (1568).
In the preface titled The Translators To The Reader was written, "...We do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest [most common, lowest quality] translation of the Bible in English...containeth the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God." "...We are so far off from condemning any of their labors that prevailed before us [previous translators of previous versions] in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea...that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance." "Truly (good Christian reader) we never thought from the beginning that we should need to make a new translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one...but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principle good one..."
The 1611 original had numerous margin notes that offer different possible translations of words and phrases.
The translators wrote in the preface, "Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, less the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be so sound in this point...It hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness...Variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded." "...We have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done...Why should we be in bondage to them [words or syllables] if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?...We have...avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans..."
Wouldn't the teaching that a divorced person is free to marry again give license to widespread sin?
No more than what Jesus taught concerning forgiving a brother who sins against you. Jesus said to forgive not just seven times as Peter suggested, but seventy times seven. Does this give license for brothers to sin against you? No. God, when He deems it necessary, will chasten one of His own for sinning (Heb. 12:6-11).
Christians should never divorce their marriage partners. Forgiveness is God's desire. Anyone who divorces their spouse will have to account to God for it.
Anyone who marries a person who has only been put away without a certificate of divorce commits adultery and will have to account to God for that.
Anyone who is lawfully divorced may remarry, but whoever divorces their spouse in order to marry another will have to account to God.
The whole tenor of the New Testament is forgiving those who sin against you.
Husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it. Wives should not only love their husbands but submit to them in everything as unto the Lord.
The head of man is Christ, and the head of woman is man, not Christ (1 Cor. 11:3).
The Lord commands a woman to not depart (chorizo, 5563) from her husband. But if she does depart (chorizo, 5563) she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And the husband should not put away (aphiemi, 863) his wife (1 Cor. 7:10-11).
next pages
