The Seriousness of the Sin of Remarriage after Divorce, part 4
This is a series of posts designed to convince people of the Biblical truth that remarriage after divorce is adultery and that the fact that the modern American Christian church has by-and-large rejected this teaching is proof that it is in a state of apostasy. This article is the fourth in the series. Click here to read the first article.
Old Testament or New Testament Church?
Deuteronomy 24:1-4 says:
If a man marries a
woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent
about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and
sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves
his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and
her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives
it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then
her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after
she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. Do
not bring sin upon the land the Lord your God is giving you as an
inheritance.
This seems to be saying that it is OK for a divorced woman to remarry
as long as she does not return to a husband that she had before her last
husband. But if you want to use this or
any other Old Testament passage to justify what Jesus calls adultery, you have
just one problem in your argument. We
are not an Old Testament church under the old covenant, we are (at least supposed
to be) a New Testament church under the new covenant. If you want to use passages like these, then
to be consistent, you must be circumcised, sacrifice animals for your sins,
refrain from eating pork and shellfish and obey scores of other commandments. Choose one or the other covenant. You cannot build your own religion taking
what parts of each Testament that you like and rejecting the rest. Using Deuteronomy 24 to justify oneself is
perhaps even more of foolish argument that the legalism one (Romans 3:20,
Galatians 2:16-19). Even someone with
cursory knowledge of the Bible should reject it immediately. But if need some verses to prove this, start
by reading Romans 4:14, Galatians 3:11, 5:4, and Ephesians 2:15. Then you can read the entire book of Hebrews.
There are passages in the New Testament which speak of “fulfilling the Law
(of the Old Testament)” (Matthew 5:17-18, Romans 13:10, Galatians 5:14). These
do not contradict the above passages. The
Old Testament has a “surface meaning” or “letter of the Law” and a deeper
“spiritual meaning” or “spirit of the Law”. There is no contradiction, it is
just that in some sense we fulfill the “spirit” of Law of Moses by loving God
and our neighbor. But the letter of the Law
is not for us (Romans 7:6). (And that does
not mean that there are no moral absolutes or that the loving thing to do is to
turn a blind eye to adultery!)
Just because the Old Testament generally seems to be stricter as to
rules for living than New Testament that does not mean that it is on every
subject. Acts 17:30 says, “In the past
God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people
everywhere to repent…”
These things are explained even more fully in the context of
some of the seven passages on remarriage after divorce. Referring to Deuteronomy 24, the Pharisees
said to Jesus, “Why then, did Moses command that a man give his wife a
certificate of divorce and send her away?” (Matthew 19:7) Jesus’ answered, “Moses permitted you to
divorce your wives because your hearts were hard.” (Matthew 19:8, Mark 10:5) Therefore the escape clause of Deuteronomy 24
does not apply to us. It is not that
remarriage after divorce was any less dirty or degrading in the Old Testament era
than it is now. For Jesus says, “But it was
not this way from the beginning.” (Matthew 19:8) It has always been immoral, but the
Israelites of the Old Testament could not receive it because their hearts were
hard. “Not everyone can accept this
word, but only those to whom it has been given… The one who can accept this should accept
it.” (Matthew 19:11-12) The Old
Testament teaches that the hearts of the Israelites were hard as stone, but in
the future their hearts would be replaced with hearts of flesh (Ezekiel 11:19). Surely, Christ has fulfilled this passage in
us (true believers) through the work of the Holy Spirit and we do not live by
the inferior standard of Deuteronomy 24 which was preferred by the Pharisees. By the power of Christ in us we can and must
receive Jesus’ teaching and live by the higher standard. Jesus says in Matthew 5:20,
For I tell you that unless your
righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you
will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
And I Timothy 1:9 says,
We
also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers
and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who
kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers…
Jesus also said to the Pharisees in Luke 16:15,
You are the ones who
justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your
hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight.
Then he contrasts the transient nature of the Law with the gospel of
the kingdom in Luke 16:16,
The Law and the
Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the
kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing their way into
it.
Matthew 11:12-13 says,
From the days of John the Baptist until
now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people
have been raiding it.
This perfectly describes the situation.
Apostates and false converts have forced their way into positions of
authority in the Church and have done violence to the institution of marriage
by approving of adultery. Their
successors have largely followed suit because they were deceived by those who
came before and continue to destroy what is left of the true Church.
Jesus continues in Luke 16:16,
It is easier for
heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of
the Law.
He may be talking about the “spirit of the law” concept mentioned
earlier or the fact that He had to die on the cross to redeem us from the Law. (Which would have been easier to do, the
suffering of the cross or to move heaven and earth?) Note that on the day of the crucifixion, the
Sun was darkened (Luke 23:45) and afterward there was an earthquake (Matthew
27:54, 28:2). Heaven and earth did not
disappear, but they were at least moved.
All this talk of the inferiority and transient nature of the Law of
Moses in Luke 16 builds up to the next verse (:18) which is the fourth of the
seven passages condemning remarriage after divorce,
Anyone who divorces
his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a
divorced woman commits adultery.
The sixth and seventh of the passages are in Corinthians who were noted
for being rebellious and sexually immoral.
They were the only ones who needed any further convincing than what was
already written.
The fifth passage is Romans 7:2-3, but it is given in a very matter-of-fact
manner. (Unlike the Corinthians, the
audience Paul is addressing here generally already knew and believed Jesus’
teachings concerning marriage and sexual immorality.) The context (verses 1-7) reveals that Paul is
merely using the fact that marriage is binding until death to symbolically illustrate
another fact. This fact just so happens
to be the very thing that I am trying to convince you of in this section of
this article! You see, just as it is impossible
for someone to be bound by both the old covenant and the new covenant at the
same time, so too it is impossible for a woman to be bound to two husbands at
the same time. It is not possible for
the new covenant to take effect in your life until the old covenant is dead to
you. So too it is impossible (without
committing adultery) for a woman to marry a husband if another man that she
already married has not yet passed away.
If you aren't convinced that this is an absolute statement, then it
follows that you will also not believe that what it represents is absolute.
God knew all of the objections that people would have to this
teaching. It is very clear that He purposefully
put answers to these objections in very convenient places.
And besides all of the negative consequences of disobeying God’s Word
there are many positives to taking the right position on the issue. A biblically correct Christian may be asked
why they don’t date or won’t marry a divorcee.
Or if the biblically correct Christian is a divorcée they may be asked
why they don’t date at all. These
situations are perfect witnessing opportunities. It is a way for Christians to stand out from
the hard-hearted majority and show that God loves them enough to spare them
from the dirtiness of sexual immorality.
It demonstrates the power of God to transform lives and shows that what
was not possible under the inferior Law of Moses is possible when one is under
the blood of Christ which is superior.
But to deny Jesus’ teaching on the subject makes harder to show that you
are any different than someone you are trying to witness to. It denies the power of God which is actually
grounds for dis-fellowship (2 Timothy 3:5). It makes it impossible to prove that you
should take any other commandment or teaching in the Bible seriously. There are still some people left who think
critically and are hungry for holiness and consistency. But they are not finding it in the modern
American Christian churches. Instead of
trying to find arguments against Jesus’ teaching and trying to justify adultery
under a particular set of circumstances, we should be thanking Jesus for giving
us this special blessing of holiness and the ability to accept it.
Click here to read the next article in the series.
Click here to read the next article in the series.
Labels: Marriage, Sanctity of Marriage
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home