Expert: Joe Norman - 7/3/2008

Question
QUESTION: Hello Joe,
I understand that the Old Testament is for our admonition and learning.  However, a church of christ answered someone's question that dealt with repentance and breaking up a home. (with regards to divorce and remarriage).  I am very confused.  Maybe you can clarify this for me.  Deut. 7:1-5 states that many men had married pagan women which God prohibited them from doing.  When they realized their sin, they repented.  According to Ezra 10:10,11, "You have transgressed and have taken pagan wives, adding to the guilt of Israel. Now therefore, make confession to the Lord God of your fathers, and do His will; separate yourselves from the peoples of the land, and from the pagan wives."  These two Scriptures were given to say that once you repent, you have to divorce your spouse.  Since we are to learn from the Old Testament, it does not actually mean that we have to follow the practices, do we?  After all, this sounds a bit contradictory.  I thought that we are not to separate what God has put together.  I hope that you can understand my question.  It's kind of hard for me to explain in great detail.  Thank you very much!

ANSWER: Hi Sharon,

I believe I understand your question and the reasons this church appealed to those Old Testament passages to support their belief. You are right to be confused. That is normal when someone presents something so contradictory to what we already know to be true.

They appeal to these Old Testament passages because they cannot locate any New Testament command, example, or necessary inference to support their belief. This is more evidence to me that their belief is false.

We can learn the nature of God from the Old Testament. We can also see many Old Testament events that were symbolic of New Testament truths. For example, Jonah spending three days in the stomach of a large fish was symbolic of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. Water baptism is compared to Noah and the Flood as well as Moses and the nation of Israel crossing the Red Sea.

We can see the importance of worshipping God as He instructed us to worship him through the examples of Nadab and Abihu - and the sacrifices of Cain and Abel.

Yet, we cannot look to Old Testament worship and determine that since musical instruments were used to worship God, we can use them in Christian worship.

When a church leadership teaches something such as you presented regarding divorce and remarriage, it seems to me that they are doing much the same thing as denominations do when they look to the Old Testament worship to justify their use of musical instruments in worship.

What we know is that the Israelites who married pagan wives were not commanded to give the pagan wives a bill of divorcement. There was no need because the marriages were not legitimate.

But we need to look to the New Testament for guidance regarding Christian living. When I look at the New Testament regarding marriage, divorce, and remarriage, I cannot find anything that tells me what marriages are not legitimate in the eyes of God. I also cannot find anything that tells me a divorce which includes the bill of divorcement does not end a marriage. I cannot find anyone being told that in order to make their lives right before God, they needed to divorce their adulterous spouse. In fact, "adulterous spouse" is not in the Bible.

On the day of Pentecost, 3,000 souls were baptized into Christ Jesus and added BY GOD to the church that very day. Of those 3,000 souls, all were Jews - and since divorce was allowed by Deuteronomy 24, most of them had more than likely divorced for reasons other than adultery. Yet, there is no mention of anyone being denied water baptism until they divorce their adulterous wife/husband. Surely that would have taken place if what many in the churches of Christ believe and teach were true.

Here is all I can find in the New Testament regarding a marriage to a spouse who is not a Christian.

1 Cor.7:12
12 But to the rest say I, not the Lord: If any brother hath an unbelieving wife, and she is content to dwell with him, let him not leave her. 13 And the woman that hath an unbelieving husband, and he is content to dwell with her, let her not leave her husband. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart: the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us in peace. 16 For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? Or how knowest thou, O husband, whether thou shalt save thy wife? 17 Only, as the Lord hath distributed to each man, as God hath called each, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all the churches.

I do hope that I have helped you, but as always, if you have any further questions or need any clarification, or maybe even more in depth information, just let me know. I will be happy to assist you in any way that I can.

         In Christ, Joe Norman

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Hello Joe,
Thank you for your quick response!  I am learning the truth more and more each day by studying.  I've been rereading Ezra 10:10,11 which says,"You have transgressed and have taken pagan wives, adding to the guilt of Israel. Now therefore, make confession to the Lord God of your fathers, and do His will; separate yourselves from the peoples of the land, and from the pagan wives."
I've been especially focusing on the word "separate" (which I believe to be a very strong keyword).  According to Strong's, the word translated "separate" is:  [Heb. 914] badal(baw-dal') a primitive root; to divide (in variation senses literally or figuratively, separate, distinguish, differ, select, etc.):-- (make, put) difference, divide (asunder), (make) separate (self, -ation), sever (out), X utterly.
Now, my question is could it be that back then that there was no legal marriage?  After all, from what I am reading there was no command to "divorce" as we define the word today.  I hope this is making some sense, as I am trying to put it all together.  I really appreciate your help and enjoy this study.  I now know how important it is to study the Word for ourselves with an open mind.  May God bless you.

Answer
Hi again Sharon,

I deeply appreciate your desire to learn the truth of God's Word and your realization that each one of us are responsible for learning and understanding God's Word for ourselves. We all need to strive to study His Word with an open and unbiased mind if at all possible. This is the only way in which the Bible can interpret itself. But denominational influences and personal biases are difficult to separate ourselves from when we study. We are all human and are fallible, but we must do the best we can.

I will now see if I am able to assist you more regarding Ezra 10.

Keep in mind that any outside helps such as Bible Dictionaries, Lexicons, commentaries, etc...are written by uninspired men as well and can have biases and preconceived beliefs guiding them. For example:

Here is what Thayer says about the word baptism as used in I Peter 3:21:

G908
βάπτισμα
baptisma
Thayer Definition:
1) immersion, submersion
1a) of calamities and afflictions with which one is quite overwhelmed
1b) of John’s baptism, that purification rite by which men on confessing their sins were bound to spiritual reformation, obtained the pardon of their past sins and became qualified for the benefits of the Messiah’s kingdom soon to be set up. This was valid Christian baptism, as this was the only baptism the apostles received and it is not recorded anywhere that they were ever rebaptised after Pentecost.
1c) of Christian baptism; a rite of immersion in water as commanded by Christ, by which one after confessing his sins and professing his faith in Christ, having been born again by the Holy Spirit unto a new life, identifies publicly with the fellowship of Christ and the church.
Part of Speech: noun neuter
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G907
Citing in TDNT: 1:545, 92

But I see no such error in the word you shared with me above. That word does not mean divorce. As I understand what occurred, it seems they were legally married, but not legitimately married because they had been commanded NOT to take foreign wives. Since these marriages were contrary to God's command and not legitimate, they didn't need to give divorce papers. They merely needed to separate from them.

I could be wrong - as could anyone who is not inspired, but study God's Word as the bereans did to see if what is taught is true.

         In Christ, Joe Norman