Marriage, Divorce, & Remarriage #4

2. Marriage, Divorce, & Remarriage #4 • This is our fourth (and hopefully) final lesson. It will deal with three relatively unrelated aspects of the subject: • Lust as Justification for Divorce, • Civil Marriages & Divorces, and • the “Pauline Privilege” of 1Cor.7

3. MDR #4- Lust as Justification for Divorce? • First, “Is lust justification for divorce because ofMatt.5:28?” • Consider: “Adultery” is the only justification we’ve found in our studies for divorce, Matt.19:9. Jesus does say in Matt.5:28 that “one who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.” Is this then scriptural justification for divorce?

4. MDR #4- Lust as Justification for Divorce? • Let’s examine the context of Matt.5:28 Jesus, in a series of 5 comparisons, shows how “our righteousness” must exceed that of the “scribes and Pharisees”: vv.21-26 regarding anger & murder vv.27-32 regarding lust & divorce vv.33-37 regarding oaths & truthfulness vv.38-42 regarding vengeance & non-resistance vv.43-48 regarding love & hate

5. MDR #4- Lust as Justification for Divorce? • Look just at the first two of these comparisons, Anger/Murderand Lust/Divorcefrom Matt.5:21-27ff. • Now ask yourself this questions: If lust is justification for divorce, then wouldn’t anger be cause for capital punishment? Given that both are sinful, does being angry with your brother carry the same physical consequence as murder? Then how can lust be justification for divorce?

6. MDR #4- Lust as Justification for Divorce? • Just as anger and murder are both sinful before God but do not carry the same physical consequences, • Lust and adultery are both sinful and yet do not carry the same physical consequences. • Jesus was not teaching that those who lust can be divorced anymore than He was teaching that those who are angry can be executed. • Is lust then not serious? Not at all- it is still sin! • Jesus is teaching in all of these comparisons how our righteousness must exceed- that our thoughts and actions will both be judged by God, v.20ff.

7. MDR #4- Are Civil Marriages / Divorces Irrelevant to Real Ones? • The point of the question: It was previously noted that one could be “married” (civilly/legally) to one person and yet be “bound” (spiritually by God) to another, Mk.6:17-18; Rom.7:2-3. • Given this fact, then do civil marriages and/or divorces really mean anything at all in this discussion? Do they even matter?

8. MDR #4- Are Civil Marriages / Divorces Irrelevant to Real Ones? • Consider first the nature of the marriage union: It was defined and ordained by God in the beginning, Gen.2:24. It was further described as a “covenant”, Mal.2:14. Throughout biblical history, when God made a covenant with or for man, “ratification” of some sort was made, cf. Gen.15:7-21; Gal.3:15. For marriage and divorce, civil ratification was necessary for the making, and dissolving of the covenant, cf. Ruth 3:6 - 4:12; Mt.19:7.

9. MDR #4- Are Civil Marriages / Divorces Irrelevant to Real Ones? • Obviously, the means and methods differed from time to time and society to society- but remember that God ordained government for man’s good! Rom.13:1ff. • Why is this even important to our discussion? Because neither marriage nor divorce is a private, mental act. They both include civil ratification and are “real”. But that does not mean they are always “right”!

10. MDR #4- Are Civil Marriages / Divorces Irrelevant to Real Ones? • One final point on this question to summarize: Governments and societies determine when people are married or divorced civilly and legally according to their laws; God determines if each marriage or divorce is spiritually acceptable to Him according to His Law. Therefore, (and as has been previously stated) we can be “married” (civilly/legally) to one, and “bound”(spiritually) to another- which is obviously sinful as “adultery”. Mt.5:32; 19:9

11. MDR #4- What about the “Pauline Privilege” of 1Cor.7:15? • Some say that “not under bondage”in 1Cor.7:15 means that one is thus free to marry again. • After all, it is reasoned, if one is “not bound” then they must be “free to marry”.

12. MDR #4- What about the “Pauline Privilege” of 1Cor.7:15? • Obvious problems with this interpretation: 1) it contradicts what Paul just said was the command of the Lordin vv.10-11; 2) it contradicts what Jesus taught in Matt.5:32/19:9; 3) it contradicts what Paul taught in Rom.7:2-3; 4) it contradicts the immediate context of v.16; Exactly how can divorcing and marrying another “save your husband/wife” ???? 5) the only “remarrying” in this text is vv.39-40!

13. MDR #4- What about the “Pauline Privilege” of 1Cor.7:15? • So, what does v.15 mean? Keep it simple and in context: 1) Married people should not leave one another, except they may adultery, vv.5ff,10 and Matt.19:9. 2) Even if one does leave in violation of this law, reconciliation or remaining “unmarried”(civilly/legally, though obviously still “bound”) are the only options, v.11. 3) So, if an unbelieving spouse leaves, the Christian is not “bound” to try to continue living withand meeting the obligationsof marriage to that mate, cf.vv.2-5! They’ve gone- how could you thus continue???

14. MDR #4- Conclusions • Understand this: Because of people I know and love, and brethren I know and love, I have tried every way I know to legitimately “see” MDR differently…. In some way that would allow for easier “fixes” of tangled lives. The Bible just does not provide it. The further we stray from its teaching on marriage, divorce, and remarriage, the harder it is to get back. The haunting reality is that we must do the right thing, no matter how hard it is. Ezra 10:9-10ff