Divorce and Remarriage in the Church

1. God's Original Design & Realistic Laws for a Sinful World

The truth is that marriage is hard work-and many are often far from successful.

Ideal vs. Reality. God's original design for marriage, as seen in Eden, was a lifelong, monogamous union where "they shall become one flesh." This ideal emphasizes total commitment and unity, with a man leaving his parents to cleave to his wife. However, human sinfulness quickly introduced conflict and brokenness into relationships, making this ideal challenging to maintain.

Protecting the Vulnerable. Recognizing the harsh realities of a fallen world, God, through Moses, provided practical laws to mitigate the suffering caused by marital breakdown. In the ancient Near East, men could abandon wives and later reclaim them, leaving women in legal limbo. Moses' law (Deut 24:1) mandated a divorce certificate for abandoned wives, explicitly granting them the freedom to remarry and secure their future.

Limiting Damage. This certificate was a revolutionary protection, ensuring that a woman was not perpetually bound to a dead marriage or vulnerable to her former husband's whims. It demonstrated God's compassionate concern for the victim, providing a clean legal end to a broken union, rather than leaving them in a state of indefinite suffering and insecurity.

2. God, The Reluctant Divorcee: Broken Vows, Not the Legal Act, Are the Sin

God does not criticize the legal process of divorce or the person who carries it out; otherwise he would criticize himself, because he had to divorce Israel.

God's Experience. The Old Testament prophets vividly portray God's relationship with Israel as a marriage covenant, which tragically ended in divorce due to Israel's spiritual adultery and unfaithfulness. God, the faithful husband, provided for Israel, but she continually broke her vows by worshipping other gods and neglecting her covenant obligations.

Hating Broken Vows. Malachi 2:14-16 states that God "hates divorce," but the context clarifies that His hatred is directed at the "faithlessness" and "treachery"—the breaking of marriage vows—that causes divorce, not the legal act of divorce itself. God Himself, as the wronged party, reluctantly initiated the divorce from Israel after her "hardhearted" refusal to repent.

Victim's Right. This divine example establishes a crucial principle: the sin lies in the breaking of the marriage vows, which destroys the relationship, not in the legal recognition of that destruction. The wronged partner, like God with Israel, has the right to decide when enough is enough and to formally end a marriage that has been irrevocably broken by the other's unrepentant sin.

3. Four Biblical Grounds for Divorce: Beyond Adultery, Neglect and Abuse Are Valid

In fact, the Bible does have a law that addresses this situation. Exodus 21: 10-11 is a text that is usually forgotten, but it provides precisely what is needed, for it allows the victim of abuse or neglect to be freed from the marriage.

Beyond Adultery. While adultery (sexual immorality) is a recognized ground for divorce in Deuteronomy 24:1, the Old Testament provides three additional, often overlooked, grounds in Exodus 21:10-11. This "case law" initially concerned a slave wife, but its principles apply universally to all marriages. It states that a husband must not diminish his wife's:

• Food (material support)
• Clothing (material support)
• Conjugal love (physical affection)

Neglect and Abuse. If these fundamental vows are neglected, the wronged partner is free to leave the marriage. This implies that severe neglect of material needs or physical affection, including various forms of abuse (physical, emotional, financial), are valid biblical grounds for divorce. The rabbis of Jesus' day universally accepted these grounds, debating only their precise definitions.

God's Compassion. This comprehensive understanding reveals God's deep concern for those suffering within marriage. He provides a pathway to freedom for victims of ongoing, unrepentant harm, demonstrating that His law is not merely about legalistic adherence but about justice, compassion, and protecting the vulnerable from perpetual suffering.

4. Jesus Affirmed Old Testament Divorce Principles, Rejecting Groundless Divorce

Jesus never criticizes what the Old Testament says, though he frequently criticizes the way people interpret it.

Challenging Misinterpretations. When Pharisees asked Jesus, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for `Any Cause'?" (Mt 19:3), they were referring to a new, popular Hillelite interpretation of Deuteronomy 24:1 that allowed men to divorce for trivial reasons. Jesus, aligning with the stricter Shammaite view, rejected this "Any Cause" divorce, stating that Deuteronomy 24:1 allowed divorce "except for sexual immorality" only.

Hardheartedness, Not Compulsion. Jesus clarified that Moses "allowed" divorce due to "hardheartedness" (stubborn, unrepentant sin), not "commanded" it. This means divorce is permissible when vows are continually broken without repentance, but it is never compulsory, even in cases of adultery. Jesus emphasized forgiveness for repentant partners, urging reconciliation whenever possible.

Affirming Core Law. Jesus' teaching did not abolish the Old Testament's moral principles on divorce; rather, he upheld them and condemned the contemporary Jewish practice of easy, groundless divorce. His silence on other Old Testament grounds like neglect and abuse suggests their universal acceptance, as there was no debate about their validity in his time.

5. Paul's Consistent Stance: Condemning Groundless Separation, Affirming Freedom for the Abandoned

Paul points out that Jesus himself condemned this type of groundless divorce, because he rejected the Jewish groundless divorce (the "Any Cause" divorce).

Rejecting Roman "Divorce-by-Separation." Paul, like Jesus, strongly condemned groundless divorce. He instructed Christians in Corinth not to initiate Roman "divorce-by-separation," where one simply walked out or sent a spouse away without cause (1 Cor 7:10-11). If a believer had already done this, Paul urged them to remain unmarried and seek reconciliation, emphasizing that such a separation was not a valid biblical divorce.

Freedom for the Abandoned. However, Paul made a crucial distinction for believers who were victims of abandonment by an unbelieving spouse: "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" (1 Cor 7:15). The phrase "not enslaved" was a common legal term in divorce certificates, signifying freedom to remarry.

Neglect as Justification. Paul's reasoning here aligns with the Old Testament principle of divorce for neglect (Exodus 21:10-11). Abandonment constitutes a severe form of neglect of material support and physical affection. Thus, while condemning the act of groundless separation, Paul pragmatically recognized the victim's right to consider the marriage dissolved and to move forward, including remarriage, for the sake of peace.

6. Remarriage is Permitted After Valid Divorce, Challenging "Till Death Do Us Part" Absolutes

Everyone in the first century, so far as we know, agreed that a divorcee had the right to remarry.

Universal Acceptance. In the first century, both Jewish and Roman societies universally accepted remarriage after divorce. Jewish divorce certificates explicitly stated, "You are free to marry any man you wish," and Roman law even encouraged remarriage for childless divorcees. This societal norm meant that the right to remarry was inherent in the concept of divorce itself.

Paul's Implicit Affirmation. Paul's teaching implicitly supports remarriage after a valid divorce. When advising widows, he states, "She is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord" (1 Cor 7:39), drawing a parallel to the freedom granted to divorcees. His silence on explicitly stating that divorcees can remarry is not a prohibition, but rather an indication that it was so obvious it didn't need to be stated.

No Perpetual Bond. The idea that marriage lasts "till death do us part" regardless of divorce is a later theological development, not explicitly supported by Scripture. Texts often cited for this view, like "one flesh" or Romans 7:2, are either rhetorical or illustrative, not literal prohibitions against divorce ending a marriage. God's compassion allows for a clean break when vows are broken, freeing the wronged party.

7. "Adultery" After Invalid Divorce is Rhetorical, Not a Command to Re-Divorce

Jesus makes a similarly dramatic statement when he says, "If you have remarried after an invalid divorce, you are committing adultery."

Preacher's Rhetoric. Jesus' statement that remarriage after an invalid divorce is "adultery" (Mt 19:9) is a powerful rhetorical device, akin to his teaching that lustful looking is adultery or anger is murder. He uses strong language to emphasize the gravity of breaking marriage vows and the invalidity of groundless divorces, not to condemn remarried individuals to a perpetual state of sin.

No Command to Re-Divorce. Crucially, Jesus never commanded those who had remarried after an invalid divorce to re-divorce their new partners. Such an action would compound the sin by breaking new vows and causing further suffering, creating "two wrongs" that do not "make a right." This pragmatic approach aligns with God's forgiveness for repentant sinners.

Forgiveness and Moving Forward. Paul's approach to converts who had invalid divorces before becoming Christians also supports this. He did not require them to undo past marriages but affirmed their new life in Christ, recognizing that some situations cannot be rectified without causing further harm. The focus shifts from perpetual guilt to repentance, forgiveness, and moving forward in peace.

8. The Church's Misunderstanding: A Historical and Linguistic Drift from Original Intent

So how could such a huge and drastic mistake have happened after such a short period of time?

Post-70 AD Shift. The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 profoundly altered Judaism, leading to the dominance of Hillelite interpretations (including "Any Cause" divorce) and the fading of the Shammaite view that Jesus affirmed. This historical shift meant that by the second century, the specific rabbinic legal context of Jesus' words was largely forgotten by Gentile Christians.

Linguistic Evolution. Language changes further obscured the original meaning. Terms like "Any Cause" (a specific legal phrase) became generic, leading later readers to misinterpret Jesus' question as a general inquiry about divorce's lawfulness, rather than a debate about specific grounds. The absence of punctuation in early manuscripts exacerbated this confusion.

Asceticism and Fear of Sex. By the second century, the Roman world's pervasive sexual immorality led many early church fathers to adopt an ascetic stance, viewing sex with suspicion and elevating celibacy. This cultural context made them receptive to a stricter interpretation of Jesus' words, leading them to believe that remarriage was inherently impious or sinful, even if it meant contradicting Old Testament principles.

9. Reclaiming Biblical Principles for Church Practice: Grace, Accountability, and Healing

The Holy Spirit has ensured that we still make the same marriage vows that God recommended through Moses, even though the church has forgotten their origin.

Core Vows Endure. Despite centuries of theological shifts, modern Christian wedding services remarkably retain the core marriage vows rooted in Exodus 21:10-11: promises of love, material support ("nourish and cherish"), and physical affection ("conjugal love"). This enduring foundation provides a clear biblical basis for understanding marital obligations and their breach.

Balanced Approach. A biblically informed church policy should recognize:

• Valid Grounds: Adultery, neglect, and abuse as legitimate grounds for divorce, initiated by the wronged partner.
• Forgiveness: Emphasize Jesus' call to forgive repentant partners, making divorce a last resort for "hardhearted" unrepentance.
• Remarriage: Allow remarriage for divorcees after a service of repentance, unless reconciliation with a wronged former spouse is still genuinely possible and desired by that spouse.

Pastoral Compassion. This approach offers both accountability for broken vows and compassionate healing for those who have suffered. It avoids the injustice of condemning victims to perpetual singleness or forcing them into further sin by re-divorcing. By aligning with the original biblical intent, the church can provide practical, grace-filled guidance for complex marital realities.

Last updated: August 7, 2025