A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W XY Z

Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary

Intro ← Index → ©

DIVORCE

Biblical provisions regulating divorce are closely bound up with the various definitions given to marriage within the successive phases of God’s progressive revelation in history.

In the Genesis Creation account, marriage is defined as the “one flesh” union established by God in the context of a sinless environment (Gn 2:24). Given such conditions, the dissolution of the marriage relationship was inconceivable. During his ministry, Jesus affirmed this aspect of God’s original design for marriage. He described the implications of the “one flesh” relationship as the abrogation of the separatedness of the spouses and the creation of an inviolable union (Mt 19:6).

The Old Testament’s View on Divorce

The disruptions brought about by the fall had grievous consequences for the male/female relationship. Having allowed sin to sever their primary dependency on God, man and woman became respectively subject to the elements from which they had been originally made. Man became subject to the dust of the ground whence he had come (Gn 2:7; 3:19), and woman became subject to the man from whom she had been formed (2:22; 3:16). Prior to the fall, man and woman had enjoyed a relationship of equality as cosharers in the divine image (1:27) and as partners in the divine mandate to exercise dominion over creation (v 28). After the fall man became ruler over woman, and woman became subject to man (3:16).

As a result of these new conditions, man assumed rights of disposition over woman that he did not possess prior to the fall. The “one flesh” relation was violated when the right of rulership opened the way for the male ruler to multiply the number of his female subjects. This disparity between male and female resulted in the practice of polygamy (Gn 4:19; 16:3; 29:30) and of serial monogamy, which required the termination of each successive marriage by an act of divorce (Dt 24:1-4). Thus, the emergence of the practice of divorce appeared as the inevitable consequence of the principle of male rulership. Neither rulership nor divorce was part of God’s original design for the marriage relationship. The Mosaic regulation on divorce was a concession made by God to the fallen condition of mankind (Mt 19:8). Characteristically, the option of divorce was a right available only to the male rulers. As subjects of their male rulers, wives became the victims of divorce. Men could divorce their wives; women could not divorce their husbands.

As unfair as it may seem, the Deuteronomic provisions for divorce were actually intended to offer a modicum of protection for its female victims. A husband had to justify a divorce action against his wife by citing something indecent about her. He was to give his divorced wife a bill of divorce that accounted for her marriage to him (Dt 24:1). Moreover, a divorced husband was forbidden to remarry his ex-wife after her subsequent marriage, since his original divorce was viewed as a defilement of her (v 4).

Although the Mosaic dispositions on divorce were granted as a divine concession to Israel’s hardness of heart, the OT emphatically states that God hates divorce (Mal 2:16). The right of divorce was grudgingly granted as an accommodation to the principle of male rulership that had resulted from the fall. But God’s original design, reflected in the “one flesh” marital relation, remained the standard for the union of man and woman in marriage.

Jesus’ Teaching on Divorce

Inasmuch as Christ’s ministry of redemption signaled a return to God’s original purposes in Creation, the old covenant regulations on divorce were abrogated in the Christian community. In order to justify the inviolability of the marriage bond among his followers, Jesus directed them to the creational model. Referring negatively to the intervening Mosaic allowance for divorce, Jesus upheld God’s original creation order by stating that “from the beginning it was not so” (Mt 19:8). Christ repudiated the fall and affirmed the Creation design.

In Matthew 5:31-32 Jesus explicitly abrogated the Mosaic legislation that allowed men to divorce their wives. He viewed the practice as a violation of the integrity of women. Adulterous men who divorce their wives reduce them to the status of whores, using them as commodities to be passed around through the expediency of easy divorce. By divorcing their wives, men treat them as adulteresses. By marrying a woman discarded from a previous marriage, a man perpetuates the demeaning process and becomes guilty of adultery.

Jesus deliberately withdrew from men the ruler’s right of discarding a wife at will and reinstated the creational pattern of the lifelong “one flesh” union. His disciples understood his intent accurately. But the principle of male privilege was so deeply ingrained in their mentality that they declared the freedom available in celibacy preferable to a commitment to lifelong monogamous marriage (Mt 19:10).

Not only did Jesus reaffirm the validity of the “one flesh” union for the community of redemption, but the NT reinforced the inviolability of the marriage bond by defining it as an earthly copy of the relationship between Christ and the church (Eph 5:25).

Despite such strong sanctions for the permanency of the marriage bond, the NT permits divorce as an exception intended to protect the innocent spouse in the case of immorality and desertion. Jesus made exceptions that established the right of a spouse wronged by an unfaithful mate to press for divorce (Mt 5:32; 19:9). Obviously, the wronged spouse has the option of maintaining the marriage bond despite the breach of commitment by the unfaithful mate. But in view of the exception allowed by Scripture, the obligation to maintain or reinstate the disrupted marriage may not be imposed upon the innocent spouse.

The other exception that justifies divorce, according to the NT, is desertion. Although the provisions of 1 Corinthians 7:15 refer primarily to desertion by an unbelieving spouse, it should be noted that a believer guilty of desertion is to be treated as an unbeliever (1 Tm 5:8). Behavior equivalent to the abandonment of the marriage relationship constitutes a breach of conjugal commitment and becomes subject to the provision stated in 1 Corinthians 7:15.

In either case, adultery or desertion, the aggrieved party has the right to seek divorce from the offending spouse and, having obtained it, becomes again a single person. Should repentance and reconciliation fail to restore the violated union, the aggrieved spouse is not bound to the marriage. According to Scripture, a person who is not bound is free to remarry, but only “in the Lord,” meaning to another Christian (1 Cor 7:39). The injunction for a single person who does not have the gift of celibacy to marry (v 9) applies to a person formerly married but who has become single by a scripturally legitimate divorce. In keeping with Christ’s teaching in Mark 10:11-12 and Luke 16:18, the remarriage of believers may not be approved when the divorce has been used as a means of changing mates, since such intent makes the divorce adulterous.

Many factors usually combine to destroy a marriage; therefore, the church must deal with each case of divorce and remarriage on an individual basis, taking into account God’s inexhaustible capacity to forgive sin and to restore broken lives. Obviously, the scriptural restrictions on divorce do not apply to believers whose broken marriages predate their conversion, since God’s forgiveness wipes clean the sin of their pre-Christian past and makes them new creatures in Christ.

See also Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality.