We Rearrange Your Prejudices So You Don't Have To 50¢ Contact
 

What Does the Bible Say about Divorce and Remarriage? (Part 2)

Last time I listed the main biblical passages dealing with divorce and remarriage. I also previewed some of the conclusions I had come to when studying these passages.

But now let’s clear our minds, forget everything we (think we) know about divorce and rediscover what the Bible says with fresh eyes. Today we’ll look at Old Testament passages that deal with these topics.

The Foundation for Marriage

Before we look at what the Bible says about divorce, let’s first see what it says about marriage. The foundational passage on marriage in the Bible is Gen 2:24.

“For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.”

This verse is foundational for a few reasons. First, it appears early, in reference to the first husband and wife, Adam and Eve. It’s the Bible’s first word on marriage. Second, later passages will use this verse as an anchor for further teaching on marriage. For instance, when Jesus says, “What God has joined together let no one separate,” he’s talking about Gen 2:24.

The idea of “two becoming one flesh” is the crucial image. It’s a strange image. It could mean a lot of things. “One flesh” might be a metaphor for unity: the married couple are tightly aligned, unified in life goals and decisions. It might be an image of sex—”one flesh” might evoke the intertwined bodies of a man and woman.

In a literal sense, a man and woman who produce a baby truly become one flesh. Armed with this understanding, we might almost paraphrase, “The two DNA sequences will become one DNA sequence.”

We will see in later passages, however, that although the Bible may include all these understandings, it also envisions a more mysterious, spiritual, permanent union that is associated with sex but is far more pervasive and lasting.

Now that we’re armed with this foundational passage on marriage, let’s see how the Old Testament talks about divorce.

No Going Back

Oddly enough, the Old Testament (OT) has little direct teaching about divorce and remarriage. The most important passage on these subjects is a peculiar one: Deut 24:1–4.

The first thing to understand about this passage is that it’s an instance of case law. That is, this is a law addressing a particular type of situation, a situation that happened to come up. There is a great deal of case law in Deuteronomy, and this is one example. Moses probably wouldn’t have thought to write this law out of the blue. It’s more likely that the situation actually occurred and Moses had to address it. Similar situations would come up from time to time, so writing down the right judgment about this situation helped to decide future cases.

Deut 24 describes a case in which a married man and woman—let’s call them Billy and Jane—got divorced. Jane went away and married another man, Ted. Then Ted either died or divorced Jane. She finds herself free to marry again. The point of this law is that she cannot marry Billy again. She cannot go back to the first husband.

That’s not the ending we expect, is it? The law sounds arbitrary at best—maybe even unreasonable and harsh. The Bible prevents a woman from remarrying her first love? What gives?

Probably what this law is concerned about is flippancy toward marriage. You can’t switch marriage partners like moving from a summer home to a winter home. When Jane and Billy split, the marriage was over, but they could have got back together again. But when Jane moved in with Ted, the split with Billy was final. Jane needs to know, as she makes that decision, that there’s no turning back. That, I think, is where this law is coming from.

You might even see it this way. Deut 24:1–4 is cautioning against a kind wife-swapping. A wife cannot move back and forth between two men. There’s something not right about that.

The situation in Deut 24 is pretty unusual. Why, then, is this such an important passage in our study of divorce and remarriage? The answer lies in a detail of the story that we’ve overlooked so far.

The Certificate of Divorce

Verses 1 and 3 mention Billy and Ted each in turn giving Jane a “certificate of divorce.” This idea becomes very important to Jesus’ discussion of divorce in the Gospels, so we need to understand it here.

In the Gospels, the Pharisees will challenge Jesus by referring to this certificate. “Why then,” they will ask, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?” (Matt 19:7).

Our understanding of the Pharisees’ question and Jesus’ answer is confused by difficulties in translating Deut 24. If you read Deut 24:1 in the NIV, the giving of the certificate doesn’t seem to be something Moses commands—it’s just something “Billy” does. But other translations, including the King James Version and the NET Bible, suggest that a command or permission does appear here.

“…let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.” (KJV)

“…he may draw up a divorce document, give it to her, and evict her from his house.” (NET)

It’s difficult to be dogmatic about this, but the NET probably has the best translation here. Although the Qal verbs that appear in the original Hebrew aren’t usually translated as commands, Hebrew verbal forms are quite flexible, and the Qal could represent a command or permission here. The translators of the ancient Septuagint version seemed to think that these verbs were more than mere narrative—that permission or command were implied. And of course the Pharisees in Matt 19:7 saw a command here, and Jesus saw permission (Matt 19:8). So most likely Moses was encouraging, or at least permitting—and not simply describing—that the man would give his wife a certificate.

The reason that the man divorces the woman is often overlooked. The NIV says, “He has found something indecent about her.” The key phrase “something indecent” is the Hebrew “a matter of nakedness.” This is more than a husband taking a disliking to his wife, discovering he hates her cooking or no longer finds her attractive. “A matter of nakedness” refers to indecency, probably with a sexual tone. If we read it as “sexual immorality” it jibes well with Matt 19. But “a matter of nakedness” isn’t necessarily sexual (cf. Deut 23:14, where “indecency”=”a matter of nakedness” is contrasted with holiness, and thus perhaps implies a broader idea of uncleanness).

The point, in any case, is that the Pharisees’ later question about a man divorcing his wife “for any reason” is not supported by this verse. This verse points to a particular, shameful, probably sexual, cause for divorce.

We’ll come back to these issues when we visit the New Testament and Matt 19 in particular. For now, it’s enough to remember that Deut 24 is where this idea of a “certificate of divorce” comes from.

Next time we’ll continue with other crucial passages from the Old Testament.

share:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Buzz
This entry was posted in Bible, family and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

6 Comments

  1. Paul
    Posted December 5, 2009 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

    Interesting topic – for me this is one of those topics that can get very complicated. As modern Americans we grow up seeing marriage in a completely different way than the ancient Israelites.

    I think its important what Jesus says about the certificate of divorce – Moses allowed it “because of the hardness of your hearts”. It think its very clear what God’s ideal plan is – two become one. period. The problem, as usual, is us. Our sin has a way of screwing things up. The ideas of divorce was never God’s plan, but it served a necessary legal function in the inevitable case when man falls short. I believe the Certificate of Divorce was a protection for the woman. If a man should became “unhappy” with his wife, there could be abuse, or he may abandon her. An unmarried woman in that culture shared the same fate as the widows and orphans. They had little means to provide for themselves and were often the victims of all kinds of injustice. The Certificate of Divorce says that sin has screwed all this up, but the woman is free to now remarry. The Deuteronomy passage has no condemnation for the woman remarrying after the divorce.

    Clearly this was being abused and Jesus comes along to call us back to perspective about what was intended in marriage. He’s calling us to a higher standard. He’s more concerned with the condition of our hearts than the physical action we may take. In the same way He says one who is angry with His brother is guilty of murder, He says that one who throws away his first wife for another is guilty of adultery in his heart.

    Anyway, just some thoughts…

    • Posted December 5, 2009 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

      My thoughts exactly, Paul. Thanks for expressing those ideas so clearly.

  2. Elsa Henderson
    Posted February 2, 2010 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    The Bible says in Deut.24 that to remarry your first spouse after an interim marriage is “abomination.” Rationalizing about things God calls “abomination” opens a whole can of worms, e.g. condoning homosexuality. Do you see any circumstances under which it is biblically possible to remarry a first spouse, e.g. after years of separation from both husbands?

    • Posted February 2, 2010 at 11:34 am | Permalink

      Hi Elsa. The best answer I can give you is a combo of bad news, good news, and practical news.

      • The bad news: You’re right in what you suggest. Nowhere is the Bible clearer on issues of divorce and remarriage than in prohibiting getting remarried to a first husband after having been married to a second husband. I don’t think time enters into it: 1 year, 5 years, 20 years—marriage decisions are life-long. They have no expiration date. So the basic, hard reality is that you have made your bed and now you have to lie in it.
      • The good news: That said, interpreting the “law,” especially in light of what Christ has done, is always a tricky business. What I’m about to say I say with great caution, but in a sense there is a “deeper law of love” that undergirds all other laws. Note, however, that it undergirds them, not replaces them. Note also that sometimes the greatest love you can give, you give to God by obeying him, even when that means not following a “love” for others. But this “deeper law” does mean that a knee-jerk, no-discussion response to Biblical law—especially Old Testament laws—is often ill-advised.
      • The practical news: This issue is too deep, too complex, and too personal to work out alone. It’s too deep, complex, and personal to work out through a blog post or comment. The best advice I can give you is to go to your pastor or elder and talk it out with him. He may not give you any better advice than anyone else can, but at least he can help you bear the burden. He has a responsibility before God to do that.

        I hope you find the right decision and find peace in it.

    • nancy
      Posted February 8, 2010 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

      I do not know your situation for your divorce from your first husband.
      You did remarry and the bible is clear not being able to return to your first husband.
      I agree that your pastor would be your best resource due to he I trust has a full understanding of your situation. I also know because we have a legal divorce in a court system, it does not dissolve our marriages unless unfaithfulness has been a part and the one that made the decision to divorce could not manage to forgive this sin or the partner would not stay under this circumstance. I will pray for you and your situation. May Gods will be in the center of your situation and His clarity be revealed.
      Peace be with you!

  3. Mike
    Posted February 17, 2010 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    Very interesting articles on the subject. I enjoyed the comment by Paul as well. I will not argue it MAY be implied, but have you ever noticed, than in all of the passages one can cite on marriage, divorce and remarriage, that not one directly gives the divorced person permission to remarry (with the exception of Dt. 24:1-4 and we are no longer under the law of Moses today Gal. 3:24-25 so that one does not apply).

    I respectfully disagree also with your interpretation of 1 Cor. 7:15 that the wife no longer being bound to her husband means she is no longer bound by her marriage vows. Though the general context of what Paul has been writing is under the heading of marriage and divorce, he takes a bit of s side issue in verses 14-24. Notice that he begins in 1 Cor. 6:17 when Paul reminds us that we are joined (bound) to the Lord. Now in 1 Cor. 7:11 the statement is made that even if a man’s wife departs, she should remain unmarried (this would seem to contradict your statement that the one who departs may remarry). Now notice vs. 14 and 16. The reason we do not have the right to divorce unbelievers is because we just might have an opportunity to convert and they might be saved. Here is the point: 1.) The bond that a Christian has to Christ is greater than the bond one has to their spouse. Even though the unbelieving spouse may desire to depart to continue into their pagan/ungodly ways, in no way should the Christian feel bound by the marriage vow to follow them into their ungodliness. Our first and foremost priority is to the Lord. If they insist on leaving, Paul says, let him depart. You are not obligated to your spouse in such a situation. However, though the unbeliever has departed, no where does Paul record any permission to remarry.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>