The Letters

The issue of divorce and remarriage has divided the church in many instances. But it does not have to. The vast majority of debates are rooted more in intellectual reasoning and legalism rather than revelation of God’s intent. 

The question is, “If I have been married and divorced, can I ever get remarried again?

The controversy arises mainly out of something that the religious leaders asked Jesus in Matthew 19:3-9, and how He answered it. Jesus also said similar things in other verses. 

“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? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 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. 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.” (Matthew 19:3-9)

There are a diversity of beliefs. Many believe that divorce and remarriage is adultery no matter what the circumstance. In other words, once you marry, you are married to that person for life, no matter whether there is physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, unfaithfulness, financial abuse, lying, cheating, or any other transgression or violation of the relationship. There are others who believe that only sexual unfaithfulness on the part of one spouse “frees” the other spouse to divorce the offending spouse and remarry (other abuses of any kind do not qualify). They usually also believe that if the offended spouse then “forgives” the offender and again has sexual relations with him or her, then the marriage is “reset,” and the divorce and remarriage option is no longer available. Others believe that divorce and then remarriage is permissible for whatever reason that they may deem necessary. 

If you look at the belief systems listed above, your mind and spirit may sense that something is wrong, although you may not know what it is. Why? Because the human spirit was designed by God to bear witness to truth. The human spirit and the conscience were designed for truth, not man-made traditions or formulas. When we sense that something is wrong, we should seek answers from the Lord. Many intellectually wrestle with the issue of divorce and remarriage, or they resign themselves to the idea that no one really knows, and there is no way to find out for sure. However, that is far from the truth, for God has not only given us the written Word, but He has also given us His Spirit, who inspired the written Word. 

God designed marriage to be a lifelong commitment (bear with me in this). This has always been the case whether a man had one wife or more than one wife, and even in the case of servants. If subsequent wives were added, then the man was required to provide (at the previously sustained level) his first wife’s food, raiment, and sexual needs (Exodus 21:10). Divorce would have violated all three of these things. Although according to the Law, a servant woman would have the option of leaving her husband if he was unwilling to provide properly for her. 

“If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.” (Exodus 21:10-11)

What is adultery?

Since Jesus talked about adultery in reference to divorce and remarriage, we need to know what the word means from a biblical perspective. 

What is adultery? (understanding this is important to this topic). If you ask most people today, they will tell you something to the effect of, “When a married man or woman has sex with someone other than their spouse.” This is the modern, cultural interpretation of the word, and modern dictionaries also uphold this interpretation. However, it is not a biblical definition. Just because something seems like a good idea, and just because something has always been culturally accepted, does not mean that we have the right to teach it as doctrinal truth. God has told us that we should not add to nor diminish his commands (see Deuteronomy 4:2). This principle is also found in Revelation 22:18-19. Most people do not knowingly do this, however. Most sincere people are genuinely trying to understand what God is saying, and God understands that, but it still does not make it right. God does not need our help in establishing morality, and even with the best of intentions, man’s attempts at doing so will always create problems (see Matthew 15:9). This is what the Pharisees in Jesus’ day did. They made up rules that they thought would be good, and taught them as commandments. They “taught for doctrine the commandments of men.” The Apostle Paul even drew a distinction between what he declared to be his own good advice and the command of the Lord.

“Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.” (I Corinthians 7:25)

We do the very same thing today in regard to our own moral judgments and ideas. We say things like, “That was the Old Testament.” “That doesn’t apply to us today.” But God never changes. What He liked or disliked in the Old Testament, He still likes or dislikes today. Only the covenant has changed. The law is good and just. It has not passed away, but rather it has been fulfilled. Grace gives us the ability to keep the righteousness of the law (the underlying, just foundational principle) of the law. The spirit of the law. 

Culture has attempted to change God’s laws, but God’s laws do not change with culture. To be able to keep God’s laws from the heart, we should understand the intent of the law through the Spirit. God’s laws are not understood through formulas, but rather spiritual principle (revelation). 

Adultery, in a biblical sense, is to defraud a man of his wife, and to destroy the marital bond that God has established. Even the intent to do so would constitute biblical adultery, even if a sexual act was never committed.

“But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh upon a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” (Matthew 5:28)

The Greek word used for woman here is “gyne,” used interchangeably with “wife” throughout the New Testament. Jesus was not referring to a man looking at a woman and finding her sexually attractive. Of course, how then would a man access a future partner? The subject was adultery, and therefore the woman had to have been married to another man, and the man had to do more than simply look. There had to be something specific going on in his heart. Something stronger than sexual attraction and arousal, or noticing her physical beauty. There had to be an intent to possess. In other words, he would take her if he had the chance, even if he never would have the opportunity. Intent was sufficient to be guilty of committing this crime against another man, and against God who joined the marriage. 

If King David had walked out and noticed Bathsheba bathing, and the sight of her had aroused him, he would not have sinned. She was a beautiful woman and he was a man. It was only natural for a man to be aroused by a beautiful woman. This is not a sin. What he did after that is what caused him to sin. He then “inquired after the woman,” with the intent to possess. Intent was conceived in the heart. If David had looked at Bathsheba and became aroused, and thought to himself, “That woman is beautiful but she is married to Uriah, and so I will not allow myself to go down that road. God has blessed me with beautiful wives. I think I will call Abigail up to my room tonight!” He would have been alright. 

If David had done this he would have been fine. There would have been no sin and no problem. When a man respects the authority of another man, he respects the man’s wife, his house, and all that is his. He respects the Lord, the author of a man’s heritage. Remember Joseph with Potiphar’s wife? Joseph respected Potiphar and everything in his house. That is what Jesus was referring to when He said, “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). 

Lust is different from desire. Lust is a condition of the heart that really has little to do with sex. Lust is not sexual arousal or sexual drive, nor is it even strong, erotic passion. It can include sex, but it can be attached to many things. Money, power, ambition, and more. Lust has no boundaries, and will take what it wants, regardless of the cost to others. Strong desire, on the other hand, respects others and abides by the love commands. 

The intent to possess. 

A man can commit adultery if he defrauds the marriage through forceful separation (divorce), since marriage is an ordinance of God. Biblically speaking, it is impossible for a man to commit adultery with a single woman, regardless of his own marital status, and a single woman cannot commit adultery. 

If a man puts away his wife, he destroys the marriage that God has established. He rejects and casts aside his obligation to her, which is financial, sexual, and a violation of the love command (Exodus 21:10). If a woman departs from her husband, she destroys not only the ordinance of men, but the ordinance of God. She destroys what God Himself has established. It is a violation against man and also God (Genesis 39:9). A single woman cannot commit adultery by “taking another woman’s husband,” because she does not have this authority. She cannot take him because he is the one in the position of authority. The man is the “head” of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. He has been given the headship role and therefore the authority. He can either take an additional wife (which would be permissible with God but condemned by our modern culture), or he could put away his first wife, committing adultery against the marriage, and causing her to commit adultery through marrying another man while she still belongs to him (something that God condemns but our modern culture allows). The marriage becomes “adulterated,” not dissolved, because man cannot dissolve what God has joined together. 

If a man takes another man’s wife, then he sins against the man, his heritage, and against God who has established the man and his heritage. He defiles the ordinance of God. If the man has a wife and desires an additional wife, he is free to take an additional wife as long as he abides by the requirements that God has set forth. He cannot put away the first one in order to avoid the financial responsibility, sexual responsibility, cultural scorn, or other responsibilities such as raising children that may come as a result of his continuing marital duty to her. 

In Jesus’ day, men were divorcing their wives to marry other women for two primary reasons. First, they were under Roman rule at the time, and Roman culture and law prohibited men from having multiple wives (although Roman men were far from adhering to this standard of piety). In other words the Roman governmental system and culture resisted it. This was Roman law. It was not God’s law. Roman law and culture were similar in many respects to our modern western culture today. 

Divorce was fairly common in ancient Rome, as it is today, and both men and women regularly took advantage of this opportunity. Divorce and then remarry, divorce and then remarry, and so on and on. Does that sound familiar? Culture has ingrained in us to tolerate, at the very least, and at most, accept, what God condemns, and yet at the same time, to forbid that which He has allowed and even blessed for thousands of years. It is a perversion of justice. We only think this way because we have been conditioned to think this way by culture, not scripture. Nothing in that regard has changed. God has not changed. 

The underlying principle, already inherent in the law in Deuteronomy 17:17, and reiterated in I Timothy 3:2, 12, that those who rule over God’s people should be able to do so without excessive drama and distraction, has not changed. I would also say that in the case of a man with multiple wives, there was always a “favorite.” In other words, Jacob loved Rachel, Elkanah loved Hannah. I think that most men would save themselves much trouble by adhering to one wife, but nevertheless, if you live in a nation where there is no prohibition, it is not a doctrinal command. 

God declares what is moral and right, but when men legislate where God has not, we set ourselves as a higher authority than God. When we do this we put ourselves and others into legalistic bondage, or legalism. teaching for doctrine the commandments of men. This is something that God strongly condemns. 

God designed the marriage relationship for life. Now before those of you who have been remarried or divorced become offended, know also that I have been divorced and remarried myself, so please read all the way through because I am going to bring it all together. 

The “Fornication” Clause 

Many believers quote the “fornication clause” which is contained in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 as a “legal loophole” to divorce their spouses if there has been “unfaithfulness.” 

“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.” Matthew‬ ‭19‬:‭9‬ ‭

However, this “loophole” has nothing to do with the New Testament church. The other gospels never mention it, the Apostle Paul never mentions it in any of his letters to the churches, and it is mentioned nowhere else in the New Testament. 

So why is this recorded in Matthew? 

In order to understand what Jesus was saying in Matthew, we must first understand the audience that He was speaking to at the time, and why He said what He said to that specific audience. The people listening to Him were familiar with, and had grown up under the Law of Moses. Jesus was addressing their hypocritical beliefs and customs. He was bringing them to a place of conviction before God. In fact, in Matthew 19:9, the Pharisees had directly challenged Jesus in an attempt to catch Him in His words. They had the Law of Moses and knew what Moses had said, and so they had set a trap for Him, “Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?” 

Jesus always dealt with the motive of the heart. 

Moses had given them a provision, not because he thought that divorce was a good thing, but rather due to the hardness of their hearts. It was actually an act of mercy so that they didn’t kill and destroy one another. God hates divorce because it hurts people. It was out of mercy that He gave them this “out,” but the Kingdom of God was at hand and the “hardness of heart” issue was about to change for those who would receive it. The love of God would now be able to rule and reign in the hearts of His people, and grace would eradicate the need for this exclusion. Any further judgments would not be statutory in nature because the law of love would be written on the heart. In fact, God never intended His people to have to be governed by statutory law. 

“Knowing this, that the law is not made for the righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murders of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.” (I Timothy 1:9) 

The “fornication provision” that Jesus was talking about is in Deuteronomy 22:13-14, and applied to those who were under the law:  

“If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, and give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and came to her, I found her not a maid.” (Deuteronomy 22:13)

The woman whom the man was espoused to would be put away because she had represented herself as a virgin, and the man had given the father the price of a virgin, and yet she was not a virgin. This is what Joseph was going to do with Mary after he found out that she was pregnant before they had officially consummated their marriage. He could have put her away, and intended to do so, until an angel appeared to him in a dream and revealed God’s plan.

This principle is also true in civil law. 

If you signed a contract for a luxury car with leather seats, and upon delivery it was discovered that they were vinyl, then you would return the car because it was a violation of contract. If it was done intentionally, the dealer could be sued or even arrested on criminal charges depending on the severity of the infraction. The legal system would allow for that because of the contractual violation and misrepresentation. If the car was presented as ordered, you would then be required to accept the car according to the provisions of the contract. 

This contractual obligation was only in regard to virgins in their father’s house. In the New Testament there is no command of God in regard to virgins because there is no difference between the virgin and non-virgin (I Corinthians 7:25). In the eyes of God, a virgin and non-virgin are of equal worth and value. 

When God gives no command, He leaves it up to our own discretion and judgment. These can be referred to as “conscience issues.” Even under the Law of Moses, a man of Israel did not have to marry a virgin unless he was a priest. Women were considered property under the Law of Moses, but this is no longer the case, and was never God’s heart or intent. God values women in the same manner that He values men. If this were not the case, and women were still regarded as property, then the “fornication clause” would still be valid, as property rights and contractual obligation would still be in force. However, that is not the case. It was valid for those who were challenging Jesus in reference to the law, as they were under the law, and so he addressed them according to their law. They were challenging Jesus rather than embracing the truth that He was teaching them, like many do today. The “fornication clause” is not applicable to the church today.  

Even in a practical sense, the modern interpretation of the fornication clause does not make sense. For example, if a man puts away his wife and she commits adultery by marrying another man (him “causing her” to commit adultery), wouldn’t he then be free according to her “unfaithfulness?” Wouldn’t she also be free to marry according to the “fornication clause,” since he had put her away to marry another woman, and had been having sexual relations with her? Would not his sexual unfaithfulness be adulterous according to the modern interpretation of the word, and wouldn’t she then be free? And if she was free, would she not be free to marry another? How then does he “cause” her to commit adultery if she is free through his own act of putting her away and having sex with another woman? Can you see how this makes no sense? A man of Israel (excluding a priest) could marry a divorced woman, a widow, or even a prostitute, and in these cases the “fornication clause” would not apply either. It only applied only to those who were under the law of Moses. It does not apply to the church today.

Have you ever committed “spiritual fornication” against the Lord? Have you ever put anything before Him? What did He do? Did He put you away?

He was compassionate and merciful. 

“Thus saith the LORD, Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away.” (‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭50:1‬)

God desires restoration and healing. 

A legalist may say, “I told you so!” “You can never remarry if you have been divorced!” But that goes contrary to the foundational premise of the New Testament. It takes no account of righteous judgment, mercy, or faith. To say that there is no way out of past mistakes, and no redemption for past errors, is to deny the blood of the cross, and the very purpose for which Jesus died and rose again!   

In order to understand mercy and righteous judgment, there must first be a foundational understanding of redemption. Aren’t you glad that God has not dealt with any of us according to our transgressions? There is grace and mercy according to the judgment of the Lord. Isn’t that a good thing? 

We must all walk out our own salvation with a clear conscience before God. 

The scripture tells us, “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19:6). Man cannot separate what God has joined. A piece of paper from a judge does not negate a marriage any more than a legal certificate establishes one. What God has joined was established by God, and only God can dissolve it. God can indeed dissolve and revoke something that He has previously established, and can certainly dissolve something that men have established without His permission and blessing in the first place. If not, how could He free a person from an oath that they have made with the devil? 

Jesus is the lawgiver, who through grace, has written the law into our hearts. When we judge another, we judge the law, and therefore, by default, the lawgiver. We should not judge the law, nor the lawgiver, but rather we should judge ourselves as to how we are walking in the light that we have received.

God can separate what men have joined without His permission. 

God separated Hagar and Ishmael from Abraham and Sarah, declaring that the son born of the bondwoman (the flesh), would not be heir with the son who was born of the freewoman (the Spirit). Abraham and Sarah had taken it upon themselves to produce a seed in order to fulfill the promise that God made to Abraham. They didn’t ask the Lord, they just took it upon themselves. God separated them, not out of anger, but to protect His plan. God separated what the flesh had birthed and joined. 

God can dissolve what He has previously joined. 

God also promised Eli that he and his sons would “walk before the Lord forever,” and yet He removed them. He denied Eli and His descendants as priests. He revoked His blessing and promise on their lineage because of disobedience and rebellion (I Samuel 2:30). 

One of the foundational aspects of the New Testament is that any believer can know the Lord and hear His voice, and this includes His judgments in our personal lives. We don’t need another “mediator” meddling in between. God wants to be free to govern His people without interference and the confines and limitations of man-made ordinances and traditions. 

“And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.” (Hebrews 8:11)

The devil used religious believers to attack the foundation of the early church. It was one of the very first attacks that he launched against the church. He compelled them to be circumcised and to keep the Law of Moses. There are many ways a man or woman can be “circumcised.” There are many ways that we can conform to a religious order in order to avoid persecution, or to maintain a sense of religious pride. 

Some people, however, have no real interest in understanding. They argue and attack things that they don’t understand. This is what the Scribes and Pharisees did. If we don’t understand something, then we should ask the Lord, and then leave it with Him until He gives us an answer. If we ask in faith, we will receive an answer. Many never receive answers because they don’t ask, or they don’t believe when they ask. There may also need to be a foundation established in some other area first in order for God to be able to answer a question, and that may take some time, sometimes even years. For example, you would need to learn addition and subtraction before you can learn and understand algebra. We should exercise patience, and God will reveal the answer in due time. 

The Apostle Paul confronted legalism in the early church:

“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that calleth you unto the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:6-9)

“I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.” (Galatians 5:10)

“I would they were even cut off which trouble you.” (Galatians 5:12)

How does this relate to divorce and remarriage? 

The religious people were accusing Paul of “giving people a license to sin.” They were mockers, with no desire for truth. They were despisers of the goodness, mercy, and grace of God. They were enemies of God and of His Gospel. 

“And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.” (‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:8‬)

God has the ability to give a person a second, third, fourth, fifth, or one-hundredth chance, as He wills. “How many times shall I forgive my brother in a day, seven times?” Peter asked Jesus. Jesus answered, “No, but seventy times seven!” We have no idea what people have been through, the pain and trauma that they have been through, nor what the underlying causes and circumstances were. 

Some years back, a very well known minister’s wife had left him and many in the Christian community, for the most part, were outraged. “If he can’t manage his own home, then he shouldn’t be in the ministry!” They were saying, and quoting all the scriptures. “He should step down immediately!” The condemnation seemed to be almost universal (one always wonders what their own lives looked like behind the scenes). I stepped back and asked the Lord, “How should I look at this situation?” Almost immediately I heard in my spirit, “As Demas forsook Paul, so is this matter.” (see II Timothy 4:10) In other words, his wife had deserted him. The minister was innocent and devastated, and yet he was being judged harshly, and without knowledge. The good news is that a couple of years later, the marriage was restored! 

More recently, a Christian music artist declared publicly that he was “no longer a Christian,” and basically “renounced” his faith. The backlash and judgment was swift and severe, and even my own first reaction was to condemn the man, but something wasn’t right in my spirit. I asked the Lord about this also and He answered me. He said, “The man hasn’t renounced his faith. He doesn’t know his right hand from his left. He is hurting and confused, wanting attention and crying out for help.” A week later, the man, on social media, stated that if anyone had any advice for him he was “willing to change his mind.” Those are the words of a hurting heart seeking answers, not a hardened heart. I wouldn’t have seen this if I had assumed and not asked. 

Jesus is High Priest and Lord, even of the Sabbath. What does it mean to be Lord, even of the Sabbath?

“At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungered, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the Sabbath day. But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungered, and they that were with him; How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?” Or have ye not read in the law, how on the Sabbath days the priests profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple. But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” (Matthew 12:1-8)

The Sabbath was one of the most stringent commandments in the Old Testament. The penalty for even a small infraction (such as gathering sticks) (Numbers 15:32-36) was death. A man was put to death for gathering sticks, and yet Jesus and His disciples were picking ears of corn and eating them. It seemed like a blatant violation of God’s law, but yet Jesus made the statement, “The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath.” In other words, the Sabbath was made for man’s benefit, so that man could rest, just as God Himself rested after He had completed His work. Jesus understood the principle and the intent of the command. The Spirit of the command. The true command!

In the New Testament there is no mandatory “Sabbath.” Arguments and debates over this issue are all rooted in religion, not Christianity. Through tradition, we have adopted the idea that we should set aside a specific day to worship God, and while there is nothing wrong with doing that, it is a personal conviction and should not be forced on others to bring them into bondage (Colossians 2:16). We can choose to gather together as we please, and whatever day that we please, as such as seems good to us and to the Lord. We are only told not to forsake assembling. 

When Jesus made the statement, “The Son of man is Lord, even of the Sabbath.” The implication was that if Jesus was Lord over the Sabbath, then He is Lord over all. Jesus and His disciples had been accused by the Pharisees of picking ears of corn on the Sabbath because they were hungry, and He responded to His accusers’ accusations by reminding them that David and his men had entered the house of God and ate the showbread, which was not lawful for them to do. Why were they guiltless in doing something that was otherwise clearly unlawful? Who made this determination? Who was the administrator of “exceptions and exclusions?” 

Jesus stated that there was one standing before them that was greater even than the Temple. He was greater than the Sabbath. He was and is the very author and originator of the law and commandments, and therefore being author, He is Lord and administrator of righteous judgment and mercy pertaining to men (see vs. 7). He is our eternal High Priest.

Whether or not someone can remarry after a divorce is between them and the Father. He will not require someone to live in an abusive and dangerous situation. It would be unjust for God to give a “loophole” for sexual indiscretion, and yet demand that a person subject themselves to physical or emotional abuse or other types of gross abuse or neglect. 

Divorce and remarriage is possible because of God’s mercy and forgiveness. Every man and woman must judge within themselves. God has given every believer His Spirit, and a man’s judgment comes from the Lord. God’s mercy is freely given according to His own discretion, not because of a “legal loophole” that never existed in the first place. 

“What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” (‭‭Romans‬ ‭9:14-15‬)

It is about grace and mercy, not legalistic formulas. It is all about the cross!