Discussion on Marriage and Divorce – Part 6

Previous Articles

1. The No Divorce / No Remarriage Position.
2. The contribution of Church History
3. What is the "exception clause"?
4. Why Matthew is the key text?
5. Jesus’ Teaching on Divorce and Re-Marriage

Paul’s Contribution to the Discussion

In the 4^th Article I attempted to show why Matthew is the key text in the discussion.  Paul does contribute to our understanding, but we should be cautious about using Romans 7:1-6 because Paul is using marriage as an analogy, not a point of instruction.  His discussion in Romans 7 is limited to the point that he is wanting to establish about the Law.  It is not instruction of marriage. We are certainly aware that marriage is dissolved by death and the right re-marry to a new husband is obvious. Paul using the marriage analogy and the death of a spouse to typify the Christian’s marriage to the Law having been dissolved by death and the new Husband, Christ has come.  It has no relevance to the determination of whether divorce is sanctioned in the Bible or not.

For more to the point, is Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 7.  He first addresses issues related to marriage, divorce, and one’s lot in life (7:1–24). He then turns to whether the betrothed and widowed should marry in light of the urgency of the times (7:25–40).  In this passage Paul deals with a problem not previously discussed.  The issue involves a Christian married to a non-Christian.  Should the believer leave the unbeliever? No.  Let them stay together (v13).  Then we read this:

“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 Corinthians 7:15, ESV)

The NIV translates the verse: “But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace.” (1 Corinthians 7:15, NIV). The KJV: “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.” (1 Corinthians 7:15, KJV 1900)

So, the case is an unbeliever “separating”, “leaving” or “departing”.  It comes from the Greek word χωρίζω (chorizo) which essentially means that. “The present indicative middle form χωρίζεται probably has the force of separates himself/herself, signifying that the subject of the verb takes the initiative in the act of separation.”^[1] That is, if the unbelieving spouse seeks the dissolution of the marriage, then “let it be so”.  How is the Christian partner to respond? “Let is be so.” “Paul advises the Christian spouse not to create strife by trying to manipulate reconciliation with an unbelieving spouse who has left the marriage.”^[2]

On what grounds does the remaining spouse to “let it be”?  “In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace.”^[3]  The remaining spouse is not “enslaved” or “bound”.  What does it mean to “not be bound”?  “That is, they are not bound to the ruling given above about maintaining the marriage. Some Corinthians have wanted to dissolve such marriages. Paul has said No. But now he allows that if the pagan wants out, then one is no longer “bound.”^[4]   Under Paul’s instruction a person is “bound” to the marriage until death (“A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 7:39, ESV)).

Re-marriage is not in view here.  The passage simply asserts that the Christian is not obligated to go at great lengths of anguish and struggle to keep the marriage intact if that’s the direction of the unbeliever. But re-marriage is inferred.  If in view of Paul the unbeliever leaves and divorces the Christian, the believer is rendered a status not unlike the death of a spouse.   It is inferred if the divorce is permissible, re-marriage is also allowable.

The fact that Paul made the abandonment and initiation of divorce by an unbelieving spouse an action whereby the believer need not contest or fight the partner, allowing the divorce does not render Paul at odds with Jesus. They are both addressing different contexts.  Jesus is addressing a Jewish community of extremes.  Paul is addressing a mixed marriage.

In God’s sight the covenant bond between a man and woman is disbanded by death, adultery and now if an unbeliever leaves, initiating divorce.  These then are the only legitimate reasons a Christian can re-marry.   

Before leaving Paul’s instruction, we should discuss divorce between Christians. “To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife.” (1 Corinthians 7:10–11, ESV).  As noted in the first Article, the early Church always wanted to leave room for repentance.  So, whatever the circumstance if a Christian finds it necessary to separate and divorce their Christian spouse, neither may re-marry.

The final issue that I want to comment on, is the issue of Christian leadership.  How does divorce and re-marriage impact the calling of elders and deacons in the service of the Church?

 

 

 

---

^[1] Thiselton, A. C. (2000). The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text (p. 534). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.

^[2] Crossway Bibles. (2008). The ESV Study Bible (p. 2200). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

^[3] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (1 Co 7:15). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

^[4] Fee, G. D. (2014). The First Epistle to the Corinthians. (N. B. Stonehouse, F. F. Bruce, G. D. Fee, & J. B. Green, Eds.) (Revised Edition, p. 334). Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.