Dodge the Ditches, Part 2 (Principles of Marriage and Divorce)

publicdomainpictures.net CC0 Public Domain

This post was written with the guidance of my husband Brett, who encourages both men and women to engage in the study of these principles.

   In my last post, I left you hanging with this:

As I lay on the couch that night, I began to console myself with thoughts of packing up and leaving.

   Sorry to leave you hanging there for so long. I awoke the next morning with one dominant thought: "It's just not that bad."
   Some might say it was God talking to me. I didn't hear anything audibly, but I would attribute it to the Holy Spirit moving in my mind and heart. I wasn't being abused. My husband wasn't being unfaithful. There was no justifiable, biblical reason for me to drag us all through hell because I couldn't handle a night on the couch. So I humbled myself before God, acknowledging that I needed Him to work on my behalf to either change Brett's heart or give me the grace to submit. Or both.
   And God answered! That day, Brett's attitude was different. He acknowledged that his leadership needed to be rooted in the Word of God, not his own selfish desires. And we had a great day together. And I praised God, and I couldn't wait for the story to unfold chronologically; I just had to share my great news with you, so I wrote Lemonade.

   But there is no fall so hard as when it happens from up high.

   Just days later, we got into another argument about submission. Brett had run across someone whose husband was unfaithful to her - I will call her Jane - and he wanted me to reach out to her and give her biblical counsel. He sent me an article he wanted me to read and pass along to her. I disagreed with it wholeheartedly. He wielded this verse:

Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands (Eph. 5:24, ESV).1

   In everything. Even if he was unfaithful?
   Yep. He said if Jane's husband was a Christian, she should bring it to the church. But if not, he didn't see much recourse except that she continue to submit, because...

Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct (1 Pet. 3:1-2, ESV).2

   And here, I freaked out. Froke. Whatever. I argued, "I can't counsel her to stay in that situation and just deal with it. I would tell her to leave. Not divorce him, just leave until she could wade through the mess. I mean, maybe divorce him later, but not until she's sure he doesn't want to be reconciled and do things right. And I would counsel her not to remarry someone else, but I wouldn't be able to tell her to just stay there and submit to an adulterous husband."
   "But that's what 1 Peter seems to demand."
   "Well, then I'm all the more disqualified to counsel her. I would tell her to get away for a while, at least, because she wouldn't be able to respect him enough to submit to him, anyway. I know I sure wouldn't."
   In his mind, I was not in submission to the Word, so he asked me to study it out until I could justify my position from Scripture. I didn't do that right away.
   By the way, my sentiments regarding Jane not remarrying if she were to divorce her husband are based on 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 (ESV):

To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife.3

   The next morning, I was listening to a podcast on the book of Exodus, which happens to be of great interest to me. I was multi-tasking, so it seemed okay to listen while I worked. When he heard what I was listening to, he challenged me, "Do you have an answer for Jane yet?"
   "No, I haven't studied it yet."
   "Then why are you wasting time on that? Go study it out until you can give her biblical counsel."
   Well, that isn't something I could do efficiently while putting laundry away, whereas listening to the podcast was something I COULD do at the time, so I was annoyed by this. But he was annoyed right back. Why hadn't I made it a higher priority? Why hadn't I looked at it yesterday? Why wasn't I reaching out to this woman to help her?
   Because I didn't have the answers. I didn't WANT the answers. I was afraid that I wouldn't be able to support my position from Scripture, and I didn't like the implications.
   And then things got tense.
   I was practicing my languages, anticipating future travel related to my passion for biblical history.
   "Why are you wasting time on that? That's not your ministry anymore. People need help in their homes, their relationships. That should be your focus now."
   In our Ancient History lesson (our kids are homeschooled), we were talking about various views regarding how long the Israelites were in Egypt.
   "Why are you wasting time on that? People need answers for what they're going through NOW. No one cares about ancient Egypt when their marriages are falling apart."
   I was researching something for a work project on Rome.
   "Why are you wasting time on that? What are you going to tell this woman whose husband is being unfaithful?"

"I DON'T KNOW!!!"

   I can handle the inconveniences of first-world living. "The wi-fi's out again. Can you go reset the router?" That kind of stuff. But chastise me for studying the wrong part of the Bible? Chide me for learning a foreign language? Take my dreams away? Listen, I love the Bible! I love the God of the Bible! I actually try to obey Him in everything. But...oh yeah. In everything. Everything short of sin.

Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands (Eph. 5:24, ESV).4

   This is so uncomfortable, so inconvenient. But God's ways are higher than our ways, and He often uses the most counterintuitive means to bring about real, lasting change. So I sat down and started to wrestle through it.
   I had previously developed a whole theology about marriage and divorce years ago, and I thought I knew what the Bible said about it, based primarily on the New Testament, but for the sake of a broader perspective, I began to dig into the Old Testament, as well, to see if there were any enduring principles to apply. It has taken weeks to work through this, but here's what came out of this study. We both hope it helps somebody.

1. According to the law of Moses, a man was not allowed to divorce his wife if he had maligned her character by either falsely accusing her of having lost her virginity before he married her (Deut. 22:19), or if he took her virginity before they were married (Deut. 22:29). In both cases, he was to make reparations to her father, as well. There is no indication of whether or not the legal consequences of fornication carry over into the New Covenant, but sexual immorality (ESV), or fornication/immorality (NASB) is clearly condemned in many New Testament passages.5 So if you profess to be a Christian and you're having sex outside of marriage, even if neither of you have been married before, STOP IT.6
2. In the Old Testament, if a woman was found guilty of adultery, she was to be stoned to death, so divorce wasn't really on the table at that point. We see how this plays out in the New Testament, when the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery to Jesus, and he said, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her" (John 8:7, ESV).7 They all walked away, leaving her uncondemned. Did she deserve to die? Yes. Did Jesus want her dead? No, he wanted her to repent and receive forgiveness, and live for the glory of God as a new creation. So he told her, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more” (John 8:11, ESV).8 If you're committing adultery, STOP IT.
3. Jesus told the Pharisees that if a man divorces his wife for any reason except for her sexual immorality, he is causing her to commit adultery, and if anyone else marries her, that person would also be committing adultery (Matt. 5:32). In other words, the only reason he felt divorce was a legitimate course of action was in the case of marital infidelity, in which the guilty party deserved death (because of the death penalty in the Old Testament, which, as we saw above, Jesus was not advocating). So if you're planning to get divorced for some other reason, STOP IT. (If you're in an abusive relationship, or you're the victim of your spouse's infidelity, see number 4, below.)
4. In the Old Testament, a woman was only free to leave her husband if he failed to provide three things for her: food, clothing, and "marital duties" (See Ex. 21:7-11). This amounts to 3 P's: provision, protection, and ideally, pleasure. But this is an Old Testament principle, and it referred to a woman who was a slave, whose husband had taken another wife. Nowhere in Scripture is a woman allowed to have more than one husband, but men could have multiple wives in the Old Testament. The New Testament seems to negate this principle because when Jesus is discouraging divorce in his conversation with the Pharisees in Mark 10:5-9, he uses Adam and Eve (one man and one woman) as the standard for marriage. Further, Paul sets a standard for men in church leadership to be "the husband of one wife" (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Tit. 1:6). POLYGAMY IS NOT SUPPORTED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.
   That said, if we bring the 3 P's of provision, protection, and pleasure into the equation, we need to take into account the gender roles described in the Scripture, to the effect that it is the man who is to provide for and protect the woman, not the other way around. This is important because the implications for men and women are different. Are there exceptions to this principle? Of course.
   My point is not that women cannot be providers for their families; it is that:
      a) A man should not use his wife's failure to provide for him as an excuse to divorce her.
   Further, my point is not that women cannot protect their husbands and children; it is that:
      b) A man should not use his wife's failure to protect him as grounds to divorce her.
   However, HER NEGLECT OR ABUSE OF HIM IS THE ABJECT FAILURE TO SUBMIT TO HIS AUTHORITY, and this MIGHT be grounds for divorce. More clarification to come.
   The gender role factor affects women in these ways:
      a) A woman whose husband, through no fault of his own (such as illness), fails to provide for her should not seek a divorce, but if he is failing to provide because he's choosing not to work, this MIGHT be grounds for divorce.
      b) A woman whose husband, through no fault of his own (such as illness), fails to protect her should not divorce him for this reason, but if he chooses not to protect her, this MIGHT be grounds for divorce.
   HIS NEGLECT OR ABUSE OF HER IS THE ABJECT FAILURE TO PROVIDE AND/OR PROTECT, and MIGHT be grounds for divorce. More on this momentarily.
   Finally, in the case of "marital duties," the New Testament is very clear:

Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control (1 Cor. 7:1-5).9

   The mandate is given to both spouses equally not to withhold marital rights. We could explore Old Testament examples of exceptions to this, such as a certain monthly occurrence, but the general principle is that the husband's body belongs to his wife, and the wife's body belongs to her husband. To withhold marital rights is a recipe for infidelity, and this MIGHT be grounds for divorce.
   In every instance in which I have used the word MIGHT, the reason I have left the pursuit of divorce ambiguous is that DIVORCE IS NEVER THE IDEAL. "'For I hate divorce,' says the LORD, the God of Israel" (Mal. 2:16a, NASB),10 or as the ESV words it, "'For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her,' says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'covers his garment with violence,' says the LORD of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless” (Mal. 2:16, ESV).11
   Jesus' instructions regarding divorce referred the Pharisees to God's original design for marriage, so divorce was only a concession because of the hardness of the heart:

Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, "God made them male and female." "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate (Mark 10:5-9, ESV).12

   Divorce should be the very last resort after all efforts toward reconciliation have been exhausted. There are various approaches to achieve reconciliation, but some can be disastrous, rather than restoring. In the next post, we'll discuss a number of options available to those who are trying to work toward solutions. Until then, keep your heart soft.

We are not professional counselors. We understand that many of our readers have already experienced the agony of broken marriage. It is not our intent to condemn anyone who may have handled their own situation differently in the past. We encourage you to seek God in prayer as you study the Scriptures for yourself, and find peace in living for Him today.

(Continue reading: Part 3)

1 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Eph 5:24.
2 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 1 Pe 3:1–2.
3 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 1 Co 7:10–11.
4 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Eph 5:24.
5 Mk. 7:21; Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25; Rom. 13:13 (NASB: "sexual promiscuity"); 1 Cor. 5:11; 6:9, 13, 18; 7:2; 10:8; 2 Cor. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 5:3, 5; Col. 3:5; 1 Thes. 4:3; 1 Tim. 1:10; Heb. 12:16; 13:4; Jude 7; Rev. 2:14, 20, 21; 9:21; 14:8; 17:2, 4; 18:3, 9; 21:8; 22:15.
6 1 Cor. 5:9-11 (ESV) says, " I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one" (The Holy Bible: English Standard Version [Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016], 1 Co 5:9–11). Those who are Christians are called to a higher standard than those who are not. This doesn't mean unbelievers can engage in sin without consequences or judgment from God; the point of not associating with fellow believers engaged in these activities seems to be to allow them to fully experience the natural consequence of broken fellowship that sin causes, in order to discourage them from continuing in sin.
7 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Jn 8:7.
8 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Jn 8:11.
9 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 1 Co 7:1–5.
10 New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update (La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Mal 2:16.
11 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Mal 2:16.
12 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Mk 10:5–9.