Reason for Divorce?

[Yitzchak]

Okay, I see what everybody is saying, but does anyone have any biblical evidence? I agree completely that a battered or otherwise abused spouse should definitely get out of a bad situation, but does that justify divorce, or should it be handled differently.

Every time I hear about a divorce over, say, "Irreconcilable Differences," I remember a friend back in college. His mom was a believer, but his dad wasn't and was an alchoholic. She couldn't be in the house anymore, so she left, took the kids and moved in with her sister's family in a different state. But she didn't divorce him, because she thought it was unbiblical. Instead she prayed for him everyday, and prayed for the marriage.

About five years later he finally answered God's call in his life, he got sober and straightened his life out. They reconciled and restarted their marriage, and it's been great for ten years now.

So I'm not saying that a person should stay in an abusive relationship, and I'm not saying that divorce is an unforgivable sin. But I am asking what truly biblical justifications there are for divorce under the new covenant.

One of my favorite passages in the bible is found in the bible is the one where the pharisees confront Jesus for healing on the sabbath. Jesus' response to them reveals what I believe is a biblical principle which relates to the divorce issue.

Jesus points out to the pharisees a contradiction which they run into when trying to keep the sabbath. The law clearly said that they must circumsize a baby on the 8th day. But what about when the 8th day fell on the sabbath? Were they to keep the covenant of circumcision and break the sabbath or keep the sabbath and break the covenant of circumcision?? The pharisees decided to circumsize. In this passage and a few others about the same subject Jesus makes the statement that the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath. he also points out that it is lawful to do good even on the sabbath.

Another passage which supports this same concept is the story of the good samaritan. On what basis was the good samaritan justifyed ? the priest who passed by was only keeping the rules after all ? If you read the story carefully , the context is an illustration of the great commandment to love our neighbor as ourself. Jesus said if you keep these two commandments then you have kept the entire law.

The lesson that I learn from these two passages is that even God's rules are made for our good and not for our harm. It is always lawful to do good even if it breaks the letter of the law. This is how those passages relate to divorce. God hates divorce and gives strict rules concerning it. But those rules are not given to prevent someone from doing good. if a woman needs to protect her children by leaving her husband , that good allows her an exception to the normal rules concerning divorce.

Now I know that some will take that sort of thing and run with it to wild extremes. But just like with the concept of grace. the fact that some abuse it does not negate it. we need to beware lest we become legalistic about divorce.

 

[Yitzchak]

The big contradiction for us Christians , not just concerning divorce but concerning all matters which involve God's commands is this..... We are not to be legalistic but on the other hand we are to fear God and keep His commands. How do we get God's heart (God hates divorce) on the issue of divorce but yet at the same time allow for compassion and exceptions??

We have speed limits , yet we allow exceptions. An ambulance, a police officer......emergencies of all sorts..... Yet if someone is speeding just for a joy ride , do the exceptions lesson their punishment ? They will get their ticket even though they use as an excuse the exceptions that are made for others. We can understand these concepts. yet when it comes to spiritual matters we suddenly think that God has no common sense exceptions.

If a person divorces for the wrong reasons....they can be sure that God is against that divorce. Yet even God makes exceptions sometimes. Do all of those exceptions have to be listed in the scripture ? Or can we just use common sense ?
I think that we already do use common sense to make exceptions to all kinds of verses in the bible. Having been in the church for 22 years now, I have seen people get practical when it comes to following the bible. God is after our hearts and not our legalistic following of rules.

 

[tiana]

Yes I believe God clearly allows for divorce in certain circumstances.

 

[ysl_75]

I don't agree with divorce but if still could not settled the problem its better to separate than to stay together, no point seeing each other but do not love each other anymore.

 

[Rhoni10]

Two examples in the bible would be King David as he committed both adultery and murder and was forgiven.

The other being the women at the well who had been married 5 times and was living with another. He forgave her and shared holy water with her.

 

[Mr Wesley]

Two examples in the bible would be King David as he committed both adultery and murder and was forgiven.

The other being the women at the well who had been married 5 times and was living with another. He forgave her and shared holy water with her.

But doesn't the fact that they had to be forgiven naturally imply that their actions were sins to begin with?

 

[Rhoni10]

You are absolutely correct. They are a sin to begin with. Sorry.

 

[Zoomer]

Are there any valid, biblical justifications for divorce?

Matthew 19:9 "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

I would by this verse that divorce and subsequent remarriage on the grounds of marital unfaithfulness is Biblical. Now the term marital unfaithfulness would have to be defined. Is that limited to adultery or does that also include abuse? Those who commit abuse against their spouse break their wedding vows (to love, cherish, respect, honor, etc.), does that constitute unfaithfulness? I personally believe that it does, and that abuse is grounds for a divorce.

However, I think that all resources must be exhausted before someone considers a divorce, even in cases of adultery and some cases of abuse. We shouldn't just pack up our bags and leave the marriage without some effort on our part even if our partner is not on the same page. The only justifiable case for someone to leave the marriage immediately would be if the woman and/or her children are in physical danger from her spouse.

 

[Rhoni10]

Zoomer, I agree with you 100% on the breaking of the marriage vows.

If a person has tried to work it out with their spouse and the other still will not listen or refuse to change then they are broken.

 

[Mr Wesley]

Matthew 19:9 "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

I would by this verse that divorce and subsequent remarriage on the grounds of marital unfaithfulness is Biblical. Now the term marital unfaithfulness would have to be defined. Is that limited to adultery or does that also include abuse? Those who commit abuse against their spouse break their wedding vows (to love, cherish, respect, honor, etc.), does that constitute unfaithfulness? I personally believe that it does, and that abuse is grounds for a divorce.

You bring up some good points, but when I checked out several other translations of the verse at Studylight.org (a great bible study site, by the way), and almost all of the other translations translated the word that is 'unfaithfulness' above more specifically as 'adultery', 'fornication,' 'sexual immorality,' or some other variation of sexual sin, implying that Jesus was saying that the only valid reason for divorce of one's spouse was in fact the breaking of the sexual vows.

 

[Katydid]

You bring up some good points, but when I checked out several other translations of the verse at Studylight.org (a great bible study site, by the way), and almost all of the other translations translated the word that is 'unfaithfulness' above more specifically as 'adultery', 'fornication,' 'sexual immorality,' or some other variation of sexual sin, implying that Jesus was saying that the only valid reason for divorce of one's spouse was in fact the breaking of the sexual vows.

You are right.


4518-porneia the word used for unfaithfulness.. means

sexual immorality, fornication, marital unfaithfulness, prostitution, adultery, a generi term for sexual sin of any kind.

 

[Zoomer]

Regardless of what it means, my stance is still the same. If a person is abusing their wife, they are breaking the vows they made before God. Not to mention, it is going directly against Paul's role of husband and wife. I think in cases of abuse common sense should be used. One should seperate herself from her husband immediately, if she is being severely beaten. However, for lesser cases, I believe that all effort should be taken to save the marriage from within the home. Even if the Bible does not specify other reasons for divorce besides adultery, there is a line that has to be drawn and that line is when one is physically threatened.

 

[Yitzchak]

One thing that I rememebr from sitting under the teaching of a bible college professor was that the tense of this word porneia is not a one time event.

The professor compared it to a person being drunk versus a person being an alcoholic. The tense of the verb for sexual immorality in this verse is comparable to the alcoholic versus the one time event. A lifestyle as opposed to a stumble.

 

[Katydid]

Regardless of what it means, my stance is still the same. If a person is abusing their wife, they are breaking the vows they made before God. Not to mention, it is going directly against Paul's role of husband and wife. I think in cases of abuse common sense should be used. One should seperate herself from her husband immediately, if she is being severely beaten. However, for lesser cases, I believe that all effort should be taken to save the marriage from within the home. Even if the Bible does not specify other reasons for divorce besides adultery, there is a line that has to be drawn and that line is when one is physically threatened.

OH I completely agree, I was just saying that this particular verse doesn't address the issue.