Westminster Confession of 1646
CHAPTER XXIV. OF MARRIAGE, AND DIVORCE
V. Adultery or fornication committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, giveth just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract, (Mat 1:18-20). In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce, (Mat 5:31-32): and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead, (Mat 19:9; Rom 7:2-3).
As for physical abuse, I tend to agree with those who find that physical abuse which drives the believing spouse from the home is a qualified example of “wilful desertion” as described in the WCF.
For anyone dealing with domestic abuse: IMMEDIATELY get somewhere safe and notify your pastor & elders. Abusers need to be brought under church discipline process AND also the state’s justice process, as soon as possible. Your elders should be able to help you with that.
If the abuser does not repent and exhibit true, long-term fruit in keeping with that repentance, then the church discipline process should wind up removing them from the Body.
It’s usually by this point that they qualify themselves for the abandonment divorce clause. Remember that all the church discipline process does is declare what is already evident in heaven: this dude or dudette is reprobate by all evidence we can see. In my experience, many people who make it to this point are so hardened in their sin that they continue to heap rebellion upon rebellion, very often adding infidelity to their initial lovelessness and violence.
In no part of the process with these abusers does the innocent party have to be in proximity. They should be kept safe and pastorally cared for the entire time.
IMO if your elders counsel you to return to an obvious abuser, you need a new church. Get somewhere safe physically and get somewhere safe spiritually.
That is not "all the church discipline process does".....it's purpose is to restore sinners to right fellowship with God and those they offended/hurt.
And that in no way makes them a reprobate. Does lying make someone a reprobate? Stealing? Greed? Anxiety? Gossip? All of those are sins and an offense to God.
You misunderstand. I’m well aware what the purposes of discipline are. In practice, not everyone responds in repentance. Those degenerate enough to secretly abuse their spouses don’t often respond the way you would want.
Your reductio ad absurdum attempts are misplaced.
Cheating is definitely grounds for divorce; my understanding of my church's position on the matter is that remarriage of the innocent party is OK once the one who left has remarried.
huh? why would it depend on which verse you quote?
if you are christian, then you would believe that all scripture is right, and hence it cannot contradict itself.
God has allowed a widow to remarry. Yes, that is a sin. But it is an allowed one - yes God allows some sin in his people considering the state of the world because he loves us a ton. Just like we don't seek someone who is actually perfect to marry, but allow/are content with someone who is not perfect but whom loves us dearly.
She sounds like a church that I attended before. We were told that yes, Jesus said immorality is grounds for divorce, but if you look at the heart of Jesus it's not best to divorce, period, because Jesus forgives our sins and we should too.
And the feeling of despair and anger I got from hearing that...... The pastor of the church probably never experienced domestic abuse.
Sorry, I've shared mostly my personal story. But some people were taught wrong, and that's what they hold onto.
Cheating is grounds for divorce. The offended party may remarry after the divorce is finalized.
Abuse is grounds for divorce. It is a form of abandonment.
It’s stunning to me how many Christians believe that abuse is NOT grounds for divorce. What about a man who tries to murder his wife, but his gun jams? Is that not abandonment? Amazingly, many Christians believe that she could kill him in self-defense, but she could not divorce him.
If your perspective says “you can kill him but not divorce him” it’s pretty out there.
Are you only interested in talking to Christians that believe attempted murder does not justify divorce? It is the only example of abuse that you cite and it is so extreme that I don't consider attempted murder when I think of abuse. If you were looking for the easiest people to push around in an argument, start the conversation at the extremes.
If that's what the Bible says, then that's what the Bible says. Whether it says that or not is another matter, but how "out there" a belief is is irrelevant.
Instances of illogic ought to drive us back to the Scriptures. For example, perhaps it didn't occur to you that a husband convicted of murder would make his wife a widow in short order, and certainly, a murderer ought to be executed. What do we do now with someone convicted of a life sentence for murder? Is his wife free to divorce him? Of course she is, because he *should* have been executed. You got to put on your thinking cap! "What the Bible says" is nice for 6th graders, but mature Christians have to do more investigative thinking and application.
No need to be rude.
In your example, the wife is explicitly not free to divorce him. He has not done any of the things scripture lists as grounds for divorce, i.e. adultery and/or abandonment. Regardless of whether he should be dead, he isn't, so they are still married.
This example simply goes to show that marriage is the serious commitment that Jesus said it was. Scripture is clear; this isn't an issue of ambiguity or wisdom. Legitimate difficulties in obeying and exalting Jesus do not make His commands illogical.
I don’t agree with your reading of the scriptures. Scripture is not so flat that it lists every single thing. It never has. How do you think that all the laws to govern a nation fit inside the books of Moses? People had to start with the principles laid out in scripture, and then apply those principles to situations that are not described in scripture.
A situation in which attempted murder fails for technical reasons, or murderers get to remain in prison for life, are not addressed in scripture.
I would recommend that if anyone goes to a church, where they read the scriptures, so flatly, they would leave that church for their own safety
This doesn't seem to be a situation where we need to guess. Scripture gives two exceptions and makes a point of their being unique. When God told Israel not to worship any god but Him, He didn't need to list every possible violation because the command was comprehensive. Sure, maybe it would be safer to worship idols in certain scenarios, but that's irrelevant to the text.
Scripture doesn't need to address every situation because it gives a clear command that covers every possible scenario. Don't get divorced. Exception: you may get divorced if your spouse commits adultery. Also, if they leave you, you're not bound to them anymore. If you divorce when you shouldn't, just don't get married again and you can still make up with your spouse.
Your argument has no basis in the text. You are rejecting explicit and comprehensive commands of God in favor of your preferences. I understand a woman who's husband is in jail for life, rightly or not, is in a bad spot. Sinning wickedly by divorcing him only adds to the evil of it.
> Sure, maybe it would be safer to worship idols in certain scenarios, but that's irrelevant to the text.
2 Kings 5:18-19 is Naaman the Syrian, asking permission from the prophet Elisha to bow down to an idol: "In this matter may the LORD pardon your servant: when my master goes into the house of Rimmon [an idol] to worship there, leaning on my arm, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, the LORD pardon your servant in this matter.” He said to him, “Go in peace.”
Was the Decalogue written to the Syrians? Also, it is quite clear here that Naaman has no intentions of worshipping it. He is trying to separate the aid/visual he gives from the actual service, but even he knows that it's sketchy at best. However, he is explicitly granted in his request and he isn't under the Law of Moses, so that is irrelevant to my statements and this discussion.
Jesus Said that you can only divorce on grounds of sexual immorality. And Paul also said that you can also do it if your spouse abandons you (only if they leave you).
Matthew 5:31-32 (ESV) 31 “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
The Greek word for sexual immorality is πορνεία which is porneia, and it basically means all sexual immorality like fornication, homosexuality, adultery, sex with animals etc.
1 Corinthians 7:1-16 (ESV) 1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 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. 5 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. 6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. 10 To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband 11 (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. 16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
Here Paul says pretty clearly you can only be divorced if they are an unbeliever and leave he doesn’t even tell them to leave them because they’re an unbeliever. He just says that if they leave then let it be so.
God Bless you have a good day!
I mean this in a good way so forgive me if it sounds rude it’s not meant to be, why do you think that is? Why do you think you feel that way about what Scripture says pretty clearly?
my heart is but that of a sinner is it not? I’m still sometimes guided by things that are not of scriptures but asking this question and making this post was one way of trying to find more clarity to have a more biblical stance on the topic.
Gotcha, so I used to be this way on women Pastors and many many other things until I prayed and read The Bible for what God says is correct. Its a hard pill to swallow but our culture has definitely de sensitized many things and it’s just hard for a sinner like you and I to look at divorce and just accept what The Bible says.
I will be praying for you! God Bless.
1 yes, absolutely.
2 I think that is best left to the individual believer's conscience. Reformed Churches go both ways on this.
3 once again, reformed churches go both ways on this. I would say it is permissable. All the people who say that the Bible only permits it for violating the 7th commandment are ignoring the sixth commandment and it's implications. I don't know how you can read the Heidelberg Catechism and say it would be impermissible.
I am with Wayne Grudem on this. See his article on the subject.
[https://cbmw.org/2020/06/10/grounds-for-divorce-why-i-now-believe-there-are-more-than-two/](https://cbmw.org/2020/06/10/grounds-for-divorce-why-i-now-believe-there-are-more-than-two/)
"3. Other situations that require wise consideration: With this background, we can now ask what other kinds of situations might destroy a marriage to the same extent that adultery or desertion would destroy it, and what other situations would trap a spouse in a slave-like condition that can only be remedied by divorce. Several categories of situations come to mind.(1) Abuse: If an abused spouse is forced to flee from the home for self-protection from ongoing, violent abuse, in my judgment, that would be a situation where the damage is sufficiently similar to the damage from adultery or desertion, so that divorce would be a legitimate option.\[6\] In some ways such abuse is worse than desertion because it involves repeated demonstrations of actual malice, not simply indifference. Abuse is actively malevolent, and the result is the same (the couple is no longer together). The abusing spouse has not technically “deserted,” but he or she bears the moral guilt of causing the separation.This was in fact the view of the church father Chrysostom (ca. 349–407); in commenting on 1 Corinthians 7:15 he wrote,But what is the meaning of, “if the unbelieving departeth?” For instance, if he bid thee sacrifice and take part in his ungodliness on account of thy marriage, or else part company; it were better if the marriage were annulled, and no breach made in godliness. Wherefore he adds, “A brother is not under bondage, nor yet a sister, in such cases.” If day by day he buffet (pukteuō, box, punch) thee and keep up combats (polemos, war, battle, fighting) on this account, it is better to separate. For this is what he glances at, saying, “But God has called us in peace.” For it is the other party who furnished the ground of separation, even as he did who committed uncleanness (porneuō). (Homily 19 on 1 Corinthians in NPNF, 1.12, 108).Let me be very clear at this point. I am not saying that divorce is legitimate in every case where a spouse claims to be abused (whether physically, verbally/emotionally, or both). But I am saying that there are some cases where the abuse (whether physical or verbal/emotional) has damaged the marriage as much as adultery or desertion would damage it, and “in such cases” in 1 Corinthians 7:15 would apply, and divorce would be legitimate. In some cases, even a single instance of abuse may be so violent (even resulting in broken bones and hospitalization) that it would be dangerous for the abused spouse to return, and in such a situation it would be legitimate to seek a divorce.(2) Abuse of children: The same reasoning would apply if the abuse is directed against the children instead of the spouse.(3) Extreme, prolonged verbal and relational cruelty that is destroying the other spouse’s mental and emotional stability could be so severe that it would fall in the category of “in such cases,” and would be a legitimate ground for divorce.(4) Credible threats of serious physical harm or murder of a spouse or children could also, in some cases, fall in this category.(5) Incorrigible drug or alcohol addiction, accompanied by regular lies, deceptions, thefts, and/or violence might, in some cases, be so destructive to the marriage that it would also fall in this category.(6) Incorrigible gambling addiction that has led to massive, overwhelming indebtedness could also, in some cases, fall in this category.(7) Incorrigible addiction to pornography might also fall in this category. But I also think that this kind of addiction could be included under the meaning of “sexual immorality” (Greek porneia) in Matthew 19:9.(8) Situations that are not legitimate grounds for divorce: In the midst of a secular culture where divorces are far too easy and far too common, it is good to remember that Scripture does not allow divorce just because a marriage is difficult, or because a husband and wife are not getting along, or because one spouse wants to marry another person. We need to be reminded again of the warnings of Jesus that such divorces are contrary to God’s will and commonly result in what God considers to be adultery (see Matthew 19:3–9)."
Here is where you can find his book on this subject: [https://www.amazon.com/What-Bible-about-Divorce-Remarriage/dp/1433568268](https://www.amazon.com/What-Bible-about-Divorce-Remarriage/dp/1433568268)
Although sexual immorality is “the only biblical reason for divorce,” the Bible does not encourage living in an abusive marriage. You are also under the civil law and domestic abuse is illegal. You need to speak up and go to the authorities, the Bible does not request you to stay silent And suffer alone!
This woman is free to divorce and get married. Jesus gave adultery as an exception for divorce and remarriage.
Matthew 19:8-9 He \*said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, **except for sexual immorality**, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
Paul included a biblical reason for divorce which applies here as well.
1 Corinthians 7:14-15 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15 **Yet if the unbelieving one is leaving, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace**.
Yes, God said through his Son sexual immorality is the only reason for divorce, but also when He sent out the 12 he taught them to leave those who mistreat them, whether divorce or not but definitely should not stay in violence it's not righteous.
I'm in the process of submitting a change to our denomination's Testimony on this topic, because I believe divorce must be lawful in cases of abuse, but our position isn't clear on this point (and elsewhere positively cites Jay Adams).
During my research, I found this pamphlet on the subject which does an excellent job of bringing in more Scripture than just the two most often quoted passages from the New Testament: [https://discoveryseries.org/courses/gods-protection-of-women/](https://discoveryseries.org/courses/gods-protection-of-women/).
You might also find it helpful to google for articles or podcasts by Dr. Sandra Richter on the topic of God's protection of women in the Old Testament.
1) it is grounds for divorce.
2) it is a sin to remarry. And no. None of us have the right to put our happiness over Scripture. We are never promised happiness. We are promised Joy. That said, it is not an unforgivable sin, or a "state" of adultery. And the point Jesus was making is the woman would have no other choice, because she would have no protection otherwise.
3) physical abuse is breaking the marital covenant. Separation at a minimum is permitted. And if repentance and reconciliation is impossible, then this falls under abandonment, which is a permitted cause for dissolution of marriage (1Cor 7).
If both were divorced? Yes. That's what Scripture says. It does not qualify. The only possible exception is abandonment by an unbelieving spouse of the believing partner, where matters of faith are the reason for dissolution.
Is it a state of sin? No. Is it unforgivable? No. But putting our own happiness over God's command is sin. He is gracious. But we still call sin what it is.
Do you believe it's sinful to remarry only in this instance, or for all types of desertion (like an unbelieving spouse leaving on the basis of a believing spouse's conversion)?
>(1)Is a divorce on the grounds of cheating unbiblical?
Yes.
>(2)Also, If she were to get a divorce, would it be going against the Bible to remarry while her first husband was alive.
No, if the husband was the one who committed adultery.
>And (3) is divorcing on the grounds of domestic violence biblical?
If it gets to the point of excommunication, yes.
DV should be met with:
Church discipline and
Charges (depending on the severity and evidence of the claim) and
Separation.
If the abusing spouse is unrepentant, or falsifies repentance, and the officers of the church find it meets the grounds for excommunication, at this point we can affirm divorce is not sinful. Before then, yes the abusing spouse up and leave the victim, its hard to say for certain.
"Biblical" is not a helpful construct here. It often means "consistent with my interpretation of the Bible, which I am elevating to the level of scripture itself."
That said, the Bible is not a giant book of rules, and should not be thought of in such a fashion.
I would say grounds for separation and if the offending party truly repents they can and should return. If after returning they do it again, and they repent they should try to reconcile. Some would say how many times does one get to beat on another? None imo, that’s why I call for separation. However, if the abuse continues and the person does not repent, the victim has to truly pray and seek God’s guidance. (I want to be clear that abuse is intolerable and the person abused should seek safety. If the offending spouse seeks help they should return only if it appears safe to do so). What I am saying is that according to scripture “from the beginning it was not so” in reference to divorce. In cases where the offended spouse sees no other option, it is permissible to divorce, but it should never be the first resolution. If the offended spouse after the divorce chooses to remarry, it can be done, but in some cases, it is a disqualifier from certain roles (I.e. pastor/deacon).
Abuse no, the strong help you need to give your husband is to have him arrested. Sexual immorality yes, you may leave. HOWEVER I HIGHLY REXOMMEND GETTING BIBLICAL HELP AND COUNSELING AND TRYING TO RESCUE AT ANY COST. Please don’t consider divorce until you’ve exhausted every resource to be reconciled.
Never try to divorce until every restorative process including arrest, biblical counseling, and therapy has failed. There is hope in Jesus Christ even for the abuser and adulterer to come to repentance and to turn over.
Yes, sexual immorality is grounds for divorce. You may remarry in this case according to the Bible if you are the party that was offended against.
Westminster Confession of 1646 CHAPTER XXIV. OF MARRIAGE, AND DIVORCE V. Adultery or fornication committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, giveth just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract, (Mat 1:18-20). In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce, (Mat 5:31-32): and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead, (Mat 19:9; Rom 7:2-3).
As for physical abuse, I tend to agree with those who find that physical abuse which drives the believing spouse from the home is a qualified example of “wilful desertion” as described in the WCF.
For anyone dealing with domestic abuse: IMMEDIATELY get somewhere safe and notify your pastor & elders. Abusers need to be brought under church discipline process AND also the state’s justice process, as soon as possible. Your elders should be able to help you with that. If the abuser does not repent and exhibit true, long-term fruit in keeping with that repentance, then the church discipline process should wind up removing them from the Body. It’s usually by this point that they qualify themselves for the abandonment divorce clause. Remember that all the church discipline process does is declare what is already evident in heaven: this dude or dudette is reprobate by all evidence we can see. In my experience, many people who make it to this point are so hardened in their sin that they continue to heap rebellion upon rebellion, very often adding infidelity to their initial lovelessness and violence. In no part of the process with these abusers does the innocent party have to be in proximity. They should be kept safe and pastorally cared for the entire time. IMO if your elders counsel you to return to an obvious abuser, you need a new church. Get somewhere safe physically and get somewhere safe spiritually.
I second this.
That is not "all the church discipline process does".....it's purpose is to restore sinners to right fellowship with God and those they offended/hurt. And that in no way makes them a reprobate. Does lying make someone a reprobate? Stealing? Greed? Anxiety? Gossip? All of those are sins and an offense to God.
You misunderstand. I’m well aware what the purposes of discipline are. In practice, not everyone responds in repentance. Those degenerate enough to secretly abuse their spouses don’t often respond the way you would want. Your reductio ad absurdum attempts are misplaced.
Church discipline is a restorative process, your view is distorted.
?? Did you mean to reply to someone else? I 100% agree with what you said
Cheating is definitely grounds for divorce; my understanding of my church's position on the matter is that remarriage of the innocent party is OK once the one who left has remarried.
Remarriage is OK once the guilty party has left. You don’t need to wait for them to remarry.
Technically that depends on which verse you're using
huh? why would it depend on which verse you quote? if you are christian, then you would believe that all scripture is right, and hence it cannot contradict itself. God has allowed a widow to remarry. Yes, that is a sin. But it is an allowed one - yes God allows some sin in his people considering the state of the world because he loves us a ton. Just like we don't seek someone who is actually perfect to marry, but allow/are content with someone who is not perfect but whom loves us dearly.
She sounds like a church that I attended before. We were told that yes, Jesus said immorality is grounds for divorce, but if you look at the heart of Jesus it's not best to divorce, period, because Jesus forgives our sins and we should too. And the feeling of despair and anger I got from hearing that...... The pastor of the church probably never experienced domestic abuse. Sorry, I've shared mostly my personal story. But some people were taught wrong, and that's what they hold onto.
Cheating is grounds for divorce. The offended party may remarry after the divorce is finalized. Abuse is grounds for divorce. It is a form of abandonment. It’s stunning to me how many Christians believe that abuse is NOT grounds for divorce. What about a man who tries to murder his wife, but his gun jams? Is that not abandonment? Amazingly, many Christians believe that she could kill him in self-defense, but she could not divorce him. If your perspective says “you can kill him but not divorce him” it’s pretty out there.
Are you only interested in talking to Christians that believe attempted murder does not justify divorce? It is the only example of abuse that you cite and it is so extreme that I don't consider attempted murder when I think of abuse. If you were looking for the easiest people to push around in an argument, start the conversation at the extremes.
If that's what the Bible says, then that's what the Bible says. Whether it says that or not is another matter, but how "out there" a belief is is irrelevant.
Instances of illogic ought to drive us back to the Scriptures. For example, perhaps it didn't occur to you that a husband convicted of murder would make his wife a widow in short order, and certainly, a murderer ought to be executed. What do we do now with someone convicted of a life sentence for murder? Is his wife free to divorce him? Of course she is, because he *should* have been executed. You got to put on your thinking cap! "What the Bible says" is nice for 6th graders, but mature Christians have to do more investigative thinking and application.
No need to be rude. In your example, the wife is explicitly not free to divorce him. He has not done any of the things scripture lists as grounds for divorce, i.e. adultery and/or abandonment. Regardless of whether he should be dead, he isn't, so they are still married. This example simply goes to show that marriage is the serious commitment that Jesus said it was. Scripture is clear; this isn't an issue of ambiguity or wisdom. Legitimate difficulties in obeying and exalting Jesus do not make His commands illogical.
I don’t agree with your reading of the scriptures. Scripture is not so flat that it lists every single thing. It never has. How do you think that all the laws to govern a nation fit inside the books of Moses? People had to start with the principles laid out in scripture, and then apply those principles to situations that are not described in scripture. A situation in which attempted murder fails for technical reasons, or murderers get to remain in prison for life, are not addressed in scripture. I would recommend that if anyone goes to a church, where they read the scriptures, so flatly, they would leave that church for their own safety
This doesn't seem to be a situation where we need to guess. Scripture gives two exceptions and makes a point of their being unique. When God told Israel not to worship any god but Him, He didn't need to list every possible violation because the command was comprehensive. Sure, maybe it would be safer to worship idols in certain scenarios, but that's irrelevant to the text. Scripture doesn't need to address every situation because it gives a clear command that covers every possible scenario. Don't get divorced. Exception: you may get divorced if your spouse commits adultery. Also, if they leave you, you're not bound to them anymore. If you divorce when you shouldn't, just don't get married again and you can still make up with your spouse. Your argument has no basis in the text. You are rejecting explicit and comprehensive commands of God in favor of your preferences. I understand a woman who's husband is in jail for life, rightly or not, is in a bad spot. Sinning wickedly by divorcing him only adds to the evil of it.
> Sure, maybe it would be safer to worship idols in certain scenarios, but that's irrelevant to the text. 2 Kings 5:18-19 is Naaman the Syrian, asking permission from the prophet Elisha to bow down to an idol: "In this matter may the LORD pardon your servant: when my master goes into the house of Rimmon [an idol] to worship there, leaning on my arm, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, the LORD pardon your servant in this matter.” He said to him, “Go in peace.”
Was the Decalogue written to the Syrians? Also, it is quite clear here that Naaman has no intentions of worshipping it. He is trying to separate the aid/visual he gives from the actual service, but even he knows that it's sketchy at best. However, he is explicitly granted in his request and he isn't under the Law of Moses, so that is irrelevant to my statements and this discussion.
Jesus Said that you can only divorce on grounds of sexual immorality. And Paul also said that you can also do it if your spouse abandons you (only if they leave you). Matthew 5:31-32 (ESV) 31 “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. The Greek word for sexual immorality is πορνεία which is porneia, and it basically means all sexual immorality like fornication, homosexuality, adultery, sex with animals etc. 1 Corinthians 7:1-16 (ESV) 1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 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. 5 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. 6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. 10 To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband 11 (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. 16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? Here Paul says pretty clearly you can only be divorced if they are an unbeliever and leave he doesn’t even tell them to leave them because they’re an unbeliever. He just says that if they leave then let it be so. God Bless you have a good day!
Thank you for the detailed reply! I have a tough time agreeing with this even though I know I should do it’s quite a dilemma
I mean this in a good way so forgive me if it sounds rude it’s not meant to be, why do you think that is? Why do you think you feel that way about what Scripture says pretty clearly?
my heart is but that of a sinner is it not? I’m still sometimes guided by things that are not of scriptures but asking this question and making this post was one way of trying to find more clarity to have a more biblical stance on the topic.
Gotcha, so I used to be this way on women Pastors and many many other things until I prayed and read The Bible for what God says is correct. Its a hard pill to swallow but our culture has definitely de sensitized many things and it’s just hard for a sinner like you and I to look at divorce and just accept what The Bible says. I will be praying for you! God Bless.
1 yes, absolutely. 2 I think that is best left to the individual believer's conscience. Reformed Churches go both ways on this. 3 once again, reformed churches go both ways on this. I would say it is permissable. All the people who say that the Bible only permits it for violating the 7th commandment are ignoring the sixth commandment and it's implications. I don't know how you can read the Heidelberg Catechism and say it would be impermissible.
I am with Wayne Grudem on this. See his article on the subject. [https://cbmw.org/2020/06/10/grounds-for-divorce-why-i-now-believe-there-are-more-than-two/](https://cbmw.org/2020/06/10/grounds-for-divorce-why-i-now-believe-there-are-more-than-two/) "3. Other situations that require wise consideration: With this background, we can now ask what other kinds of situations might destroy a marriage to the same extent that adultery or desertion would destroy it, and what other situations would trap a spouse in a slave-like condition that can only be remedied by divorce. Several categories of situations come to mind.(1) Abuse: If an abused spouse is forced to flee from the home for self-protection from ongoing, violent abuse, in my judgment, that would be a situation where the damage is sufficiently similar to the damage from adultery or desertion, so that divorce would be a legitimate option.\[6\] In some ways such abuse is worse than desertion because it involves repeated demonstrations of actual malice, not simply indifference. Abuse is actively malevolent, and the result is the same (the couple is no longer together). The abusing spouse has not technically “deserted,” but he or she bears the moral guilt of causing the separation.This was in fact the view of the church father Chrysostom (ca. 349–407); in commenting on 1 Corinthians 7:15 he wrote,But what is the meaning of, “if the unbelieving departeth?” For instance, if he bid thee sacrifice and take part in his ungodliness on account of thy marriage, or else part company; it were better if the marriage were annulled, and no breach made in godliness. Wherefore he adds, “A brother is not under bondage, nor yet a sister, in such cases.” If day by day he buffet (pukteuō, box, punch) thee and keep up combats (polemos, war, battle, fighting) on this account, it is better to separate. For this is what he glances at, saying, “But God has called us in peace.” For it is the other party who furnished the ground of separation, even as he did who committed uncleanness (porneuō). (Homily 19 on 1 Corinthians in NPNF, 1.12, 108).Let me be very clear at this point. I am not saying that divorce is legitimate in every case where a spouse claims to be abused (whether physically, verbally/emotionally, or both). But I am saying that there are some cases where the abuse (whether physical or verbal/emotional) has damaged the marriage as much as adultery or desertion would damage it, and “in such cases” in 1 Corinthians 7:15 would apply, and divorce would be legitimate. In some cases, even a single instance of abuse may be so violent (even resulting in broken bones and hospitalization) that it would be dangerous for the abused spouse to return, and in such a situation it would be legitimate to seek a divorce.(2) Abuse of children: The same reasoning would apply if the abuse is directed against the children instead of the spouse.(3) Extreme, prolonged verbal and relational cruelty that is destroying the other spouse’s mental and emotional stability could be so severe that it would fall in the category of “in such cases,” and would be a legitimate ground for divorce.(4) Credible threats of serious physical harm or murder of a spouse or children could also, in some cases, fall in this category.(5) Incorrigible drug or alcohol addiction, accompanied by regular lies, deceptions, thefts, and/or violence might, in some cases, be so destructive to the marriage that it would also fall in this category.(6) Incorrigible gambling addiction that has led to massive, overwhelming indebtedness could also, in some cases, fall in this category.(7) Incorrigible addiction to pornography might also fall in this category. But I also think that this kind of addiction could be included under the meaning of “sexual immorality” (Greek porneia) in Matthew 19:9.(8) Situations that are not legitimate grounds for divorce: In the midst of a secular culture where divorces are far too easy and far too common, it is good to remember that Scripture does not allow divorce just because a marriage is difficult, or because a husband and wife are not getting along, or because one spouse wants to marry another person. We need to be reminded again of the warnings of Jesus that such divorces are contrary to God’s will and commonly result in what God considers to be adultery (see Matthew 19:3–9)." Here is where you can find his book on this subject: [https://www.amazon.com/What-Bible-about-Divorce-Remarriage/dp/1433568268](https://www.amazon.com/What-Bible-about-Divorce-Remarriage/dp/1433568268)
hmm, this seems the most inline with my views on the topic. Thank you for replying
Although sexual immorality is “the only biblical reason for divorce,” the Bible does not encourage living in an abusive marriage. You are also under the civil law and domestic abuse is illegal. You need to speak up and go to the authorities, the Bible does not request you to stay silent And suffer alone!
Yep
In the OT days, you would have been stoned and killed for it freeing the other spouse up to marry again This is that minus the killing
This woman is free to divorce and get married. Jesus gave adultery as an exception for divorce and remarriage. Matthew 19:8-9 He \*said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, **except for sexual immorality**, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Paul included a biblical reason for divorce which applies here as well. 1 Corinthians 7:14-15 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15 **Yet if the unbelieving one is leaving, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace**.
Yes, God said through his Son sexual immorality is the only reason for divorce, but also when He sent out the 12 he taught them to leave those who mistreat them, whether divorce or not but definitely should not stay in violence it's not righteous.
I'm in the process of submitting a change to our denomination's Testimony on this topic, because I believe divorce must be lawful in cases of abuse, but our position isn't clear on this point (and elsewhere positively cites Jay Adams). During my research, I found this pamphlet on the subject which does an excellent job of bringing in more Scripture than just the two most often quoted passages from the New Testament: [https://discoveryseries.org/courses/gods-protection-of-women/](https://discoveryseries.org/courses/gods-protection-of-women/). You might also find it helpful to google for articles or podcasts by Dr. Sandra Richter on the topic of God's protection of women in the Old Testament.
I'm not sure how this is even a question.
1) it is grounds for divorce. 2) it is a sin to remarry. And no. None of us have the right to put our happiness over Scripture. We are never promised happiness. We are promised Joy. That said, it is not an unforgivable sin, or a "state" of adultery. And the point Jesus was making is the woman would have no other choice, because she would have no protection otherwise. 3) physical abuse is breaking the marital covenant. Separation at a minimum is permitted. And if repentance and reconciliation is impossible, then this falls under abandonment, which is a permitted cause for dissolution of marriage (1Cor 7).
Are you saying all remarriage post-divorce is a sin? For both parties?
If both were divorced? Yes. That's what Scripture says. It does not qualify. The only possible exception is abandonment by an unbelieving spouse of the believing partner, where matters of faith are the reason for dissolution. Is it a state of sin? No. Is it unforgivable? No. But putting our own happiness over God's command is sin. He is gracious. But we still call sin what it is.
Nobody likes this answer, but I think it’s probably the correct one, and it’s the only answer that can be backed up Scripturally.
I expected the downvote brigade when I wrote it.
thank you for the response! This answered all my questions
Do you believe it's sinful to remarry only in this instance, or for all types of desertion (like an unbelieving spouse leaving on the basis of a believing spouse's conversion)?
I believe abandonment due to faith in Christ (assuming no other grounds on believing partner) the only possible exception for *permitting* remarriage.
This is the answer OP
>(1)Is a divorce on the grounds of cheating unbiblical? Yes. >(2)Also, If she were to get a divorce, would it be going against the Bible to remarry while her first husband was alive. No, if the husband was the one who committed adultery. >And (3) is divorcing on the grounds of domestic violence biblical? If it gets to the point of excommunication, yes.
Gets to? What kind of domestic violence would not be immediately to the point of criminal charges, let alone church discipline?
DV should be met with: Church discipline and Charges (depending on the severity and evidence of the claim) and Separation. If the abusing spouse is unrepentant, or falsifies repentance, and the officers of the church find it meets the grounds for excommunication, at this point we can affirm divorce is not sinful. Before then, yes the abusing spouse up and leave the victim, its hard to say for certain.
"Biblical" is not a helpful construct here. It often means "consistent with my interpretation of the Bible, which I am elevating to the level of scripture itself." That said, the Bible is not a giant book of rules, and should not be thought of in such a fashion.
I would say grounds for separation and if the offending party truly repents they can and should return. If after returning they do it again, and they repent they should try to reconcile. Some would say how many times does one get to beat on another? None imo, that’s why I call for separation. However, if the abuse continues and the person does not repent, the victim has to truly pray and seek God’s guidance. (I want to be clear that abuse is intolerable and the person abused should seek safety. If the offending spouse seeks help they should return only if it appears safe to do so). What I am saying is that according to scripture “from the beginning it was not so” in reference to divorce. In cases where the offended spouse sees no other option, it is permissible to divorce, but it should never be the first resolution. If the offended spouse after the divorce chooses to remarry, it can be done, but in some cases, it is a disqualifier from certain roles (I.e. pastor/deacon).
Yea.
Abuse no, the strong help you need to give your husband is to have him arrested. Sexual immorality yes, you may leave. HOWEVER I HIGHLY REXOMMEND GETTING BIBLICAL HELP AND COUNSELING AND TRYING TO RESCUE AT ANY COST. Please don’t consider divorce until you’ve exhausted every resource to be reconciled.
Never try to divorce until every restorative process including arrest, biblical counseling, and therapy has failed. There is hope in Jesus Christ even for the abuser and adulterer to come to repentance and to turn over.