Expert: Joe Norman - 9/1/2007

Question
QUESTION: Hello Bro. Norman,
I have a question that has been answered differently every time I ask. Some answers even sound denominational, some plain, huh.  According to Deut. 24:1-4 if a man divorces his wife, she marries another man and he divorces her he is not allowed to remarry her because that would be an abomination before God.  In the old testament women weren't allowed to divorce. But in the new testament women are allowed to divorce. My question is wouldn't the woman also bring an abomination before God if she remarried an husband that's been unclean twice.  Aren't we all responsible for our own salvation man or woman?  And wouldn't the only way to correct that sin be divorce again?  Please give me book, chapter,and verse with your answer please.  Please do understand that your time is GREATLY APPRECIATED

ANSWER:   I deeply appreciate you allowing me the opportunity to answer your question, but am quite sure my answer will again be different than you have received from anyone else...especially in the churches of Christ. There are many problems with understanding exactly what the Bible reveals regarding divorce and remarriage, not the least of which is poor exegesis of the topic. You are correct that only men could give a bill of divorcement under the OT Law and it is also true that by the time of Christianity either party could obtain a divorce. Another important thing to remember is that polygamy was accepted and practiced in OT times.

Let's begin by analyzing what is revealed in Deuteronomy 24.

Deut.24:1-4 (ASV)
 When a man taketh a wife, and marrieth her, then it shall be, if she find no favor in his eyes, because he hath found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.2  And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.3  And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, who took her to be his wife;4  her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before Jehovah: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which Jehovah thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

 It is clear that in the first verse there is a condition to be met for a divorce. It says, if he found something "unseemly" in her. The KJV says "uncleanness" but the Hebrew is not much help in narrowing what this refers to specifically. Yet divorce is not manditory even if there is "uncleanness" found in her. The only other place the same Hebrew word is used for "uncleanness" is found in Deut.23:14 and is translated "anything indescent" by the RSV in a context that obviously refers to uncovered excrement and not to sexual conduct. The word is ambiguous and difficult to define.

Regardless, the woman was free to marry the second man in spite of this "uncleanness" that the first husband found in her. The main reason for Moses commanding the husband to give her a "bill of divorcement" was to help the woman survive. Men had all power back then and if she had not been given the "bill of divorcement", she would not have been free to marry again and would have been in poverty and probably homeless the rest of her life.

Remarriage was assumed to be the normal course in OT times if a woman received a bill of divorcement. The essential phrase of the bill was "You are free to any man."
Yet, there were restrictions. To re-unite with the original husband was impossible. This is completely opposite of what is taught in most all churches of Christ.

 Another fact in these four verses from Deat.24 is that there is nothing to indicate that the woman cannot marry anyone after her second husband dies or divorces her. It just states that the original husband cannot take her back.

I am not sure I understand your question regarding a husband who has been "unclean twice." In Christianity, there is no instruction for original spouses to reconcile or not to reconcile. The closest we can come is found in I Corinthians 7. Yet, this is a verse that has been abused by many in the churches of Christ. Here is what Paul wrote:

1 Cor.7:10,11
10  But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord, That the wife depart not from her husband 11  (but should she depart, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband); and that the husband leave not his wife.

 Paul does not use the word divorce here. He says the woman must not leave or depart. The Greek actually means to place room between. This is NOT divorce but separation. Anyone who claim otherwise is forcing the passage to fit their pre-conceived opinion and is NOT using proper exegesis. Paul never mentions what to do if the wife (or husband has a 2nd marriage that end in divorce or death and whether or not it is acceptable to marry the original husband.

Regarding your last question, there is an old saying that I think is a universal truth..."Two wrongs do not make a right." I have not found one single verse in all the Bible that indicates it is acceptable to divorce to make a person right with God. There is also NOTHING in the NT to indicate it is even possible to be in a perpetual state of adultery. I have not found a verse that using the term "adultrous marriage" anywhere.

 I am NOT advocating divorce for ANY reason. I hate divorce with all that I am. I am divorced. My wife was unfaithful to me after 11 yrs of marriage. I did not want the divorce even though she was unfaithful. Yet, I could not force her to stay in the marriage. I never want ANYONE to experience divorce. But I do not see anything to indicate divorce in a 2nd or 3rd marriage and living a life of celebacy is required to make one's life right with God. God hates divorce. If there is a passage that teaches an adulterous spouse who is divorced can never again marry and be faithful to their second spouse, I have not found it.

 A passage that has never fit well with what is traditionally taught in the restoration movement is also found in I Corinthians 7.

1 Cor.7:8,9
8  But I say to the unmarried and to widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.9  But if they have not continency, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

This clearly indicates that if a person is not able to live a celibate life, it is better to marry than to burn (with passion). Another verse that is problematic for many in the churches of Christ is found in I Timothy 4.

1 Tim.4:1  But the Spirit saith expressly, that in later times some shall fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons,2  through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron;3  forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by them that believe and know the truth.

Forbidding to marry is listed among other things Paul calls "doctrines of demons." This is very revealing to me. Why is it that adultery and divorce are viewed as unforgivable sins? There is only one sin that is unforgivable according to God and that is blasphemy of the Spirit. I have a feeling that you will not agree with what I have presented, but I have provided book, chapter, and verse. There is much more I can present to you and if you would like to continue to discuss and study together, I am more than willing to study with you. I hope that I have answered your questions adequately, but my main concern is to speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where it is silent. God's Word is our soul authority. I am committed to Christ and His Commandments.

 May God bless you in your honest seeking of His Truth. I pray that you will continue to grow Spiritually and will always study His Word without pre-conceived conclusions guiding you.

         Immersed Into Christ, Joe Norman





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

QUESTION: Hello again Br.  Norman,
You are correct I have more questions. The Mosaic law permitted divorce because of the hard heartedness of men a woman could burn the bread and get a "bill of divorcement".  That bill stated she may marry again yes for survival reasons.  The abomination isn't stated for her marrying a second husband it's when the first husband remarries her. Christians may only divorce because of fornication/adultry. Depart from and put away is separation Paul hasn't stated the word divorce. Man can no longer divorce for bread burning because Christ has already said "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultry; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultry."(Matthew 19:9)(NKJV) And in v. 10 the disiples said to him "If such is the case of the man with HIS wife, it's better not to marry. And Jesus said that all cannot not accept this saying but only those to whom it has been given: v.11.  Paul was saying that celibatecy gave more "energy to focus on the work of the Lord without the concerns of a spouse to please.  Talking to Christians who know that sexual immorality is the only reason for divorce, singles and widows.  I know that divorce is forgivable (adultery is forgivable).  But to remain in that sin (married to another except it be for fornication/adultery) doesn't make it right. You can repent all the days of your life but to remain in sin is death and the only way outof that sin is divorce out of an unauthorized marriage. So that would be a righteous divorce. So I get all that. There's still that abomination before God if we remarry a spouse who we have divorced for sexual immorality.  Again Bro. Norman I appreciate your time that you have taken out to answer my questions.  You don't know how much this means to me to have someone answer my questions with BCV and not with "I think God meant."  THANK YOU, THANK YOU  ANGIE
ANSWER:   I am happy that you had more questions for me on this topic and again thank you for the honor of answering you. Yes, the Mosaic Law permitted divorce because of the hardness of hearts. Yet, Moses never allowed divorce for trivial reasons. This was something that the Pharisees elaborated on.

You stated that Christians may only divorce because of fornication/adultery, but I see nothing that is directed toward Christians that teaches this exception. Keep in mind that Jesus was not addressing Christians, but Jews. The New Testament was not even in place until the death of the testator (Jesus) according to Hebrews 9:16,17. Jesus did not contradict the Law or introduce something new to the Pharisees because if He had, they would have stoned Him that very moment. They were trying to find a reason to kill Him. What Jesus did was correct the error in what the Pharisees were teaching. He stated that the original plan of God was one man and one woman to become one flesh until death.
 
 The most accurate translation we have of Matthew 19:9 is found in the ASV.

Matt.19:9
9  And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery.

You already noted that "depart from" and "put away" is separation, but need to realize that Jesus did not use the word "divorce" in Matthew 19:9. The Greek is "apoluo". If you will notice in verse 7 of chapter 19, there were two parts to divorce among Israelites. The man would put his wife away and give her a bill of divorcement. Obviously, if a woman was "put away" without getting a bill of divorcement and then would marry another man, that would be adultery because they never got that "bill of divorcement" and were technically still bound to their first husband.

 Matthew 19:9 was not directed toward Christians, but to Jews. You are again correct in your analysis of verses 10 and 11. Also, Paul was stating something very similar to what Jesus said in 19:11. Paul stated that it would be more beneficial to the church for a man or woman to remain unmarried and focus most of their attention to God's Work...but Paul knew that very few could live a celebate life and endure the temptations of sexual desires. That is why he said it is better to marry than to burn.

 Now in regard to your statements on remaining in that sin (adultery), how is that possible? Nowhere is there any indication of a divorce not being recognized. Here are some examples in the Bible to consider.

 First is the woman at the well.(John 4:16-18) Jesus asked her to ask her husband to come to the well. She said she did not have a husband. What was Jesus' response to her? He told her that she answered well because she actually has had five husbands and the man she was currently living with was not her husband. Jesus recognized all five of those marriages as legitimate husbands.

The second example to consider is King David. Keep in mind that in David's time, the penalty for adultery and murder was death. Did David commit adultery with Bathsheba? Yes! Did he plot to have her husband killed? Yes! David was a man after God's own heart. Yet, he did these evil things. Did David repent of these sins? Yes! Was he forgiven? Yes! (II Samuel 12) How did he repent of adultery with Bathsheba without divorcing her? Yes, the first child she was pregnant with died, but her second child was Solomon. It is my contention that divorce is still recognized by God because of the hardness of man's heart. Divorce is NEVER acceptable to God but I see nothing in scripture to indicate there is any such thing as an "adulterous marriage." If a person divorces for reasons other than adultery and marries another, it was a sin to divorce the first spouse, but that person does not commit adultery by marrying another. They can learn from their past and remain faithful to the second husband...hence, there is no adultery in the second marriage.

I never want to condone divorce and remarriage for any reason. A person, especially a Christian, should marry once and for life. Yet, Paul is quite clear that very few can live a celebate life and resist the sexual desires. He also clearly includes forbidding ANYONE to marry is a doctrine of demons. I see no scripture that teaches divorce is a way out of the sin of adultery. You did not even present a passage that supports that statement of yours. You are also still speaking of what is taught in Deuteronomy 24 as divorce for sexual immorality. This is not what the word used means. The meaning is quite vague. It is interpreted as "uncleanness" but it is not clear what this uncleanness is. There is no teaching in the New Testament to Christians stating that any marriage is "adulterous" or any example of a married couple being told they needed to divorce to reconcile themselves to God. David repented of his adultery with Bathsheba without the need to divorce...remember that.

 I do hope that I have helped you understand God's Word more accurately. Unfortunately, the teachings you have heard all your life are influencing your analysis of God's Word. At one time, I thought much the same as you and the majority of those in the churches of Christ on the topic of divorce and remarriage. Yet, two things cannot be reconciled in the traditional teaching. Paul includes those who are divorced when he speaks to the unmarried and the widows and tells them if they do marry, they do not sin and it is better to marry than to burn with passion. The other thing Paul clearly teaches is that forbiding to marry is a doctrine of demons. There is no way to avoid these clear teachings from Paul.

  Those clear teachings from Paul always contradicted what was traditionally taught to me regarding divorce and remarriage. The only way to reconcile Paul's clear statements is to make huge assumptions and use poor exegesis. We must not let pre-conceived ideas and beliefs to sway how we understand any passage. Let the Bible speak for itself.

         Immersed Into Christ, Joe Norman

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

QUESTION: Hello again Br. Norman,
Again I thank you for your time.  I am enjoying these different responses to this question, no one has ever brung up David and Bathsheba's situation.  

First I'll start off with myself this time.  I was basically raised in the baptist tradition.  Thanks to my mother (she was baptist convinced at one time) she always encouraged me and my brothers to read the Word for ourselves. As a kid my questions were geared towards her when the "Rev." was in the pulpit teaching something that was contradictory to the Bible.  When I was 16 Bro. Walker gave me be chapter and verse on everything that came out of his mouth.  Therefore I HBRCB  for the remissions of my sins.

The church where Bro. Walker taught was a very small one it consisted of about 5-7 families.  Remarriage wasn't discussed this deeply I don't know why or I could have missed it when it was more in depth. I don't know.

I got married to my husband who was in the Army. Therefore I have been to many different churches of Christ and this question has gotten many different answers.  What I trying to say is that I'm not pre-programmed into one way of thinking but my reading on this subject is still different from the many different responses I've gotten.  Wait there is Bro. McCollum who agrees with me but I want to be certain in every way that I get it correct before some other sister asks the same question.

I too was divorced my husband went outside of the marriage and also married another woman I do not believe with my ownself righteousness that neither party can remarry as you've stated Paul gives instruction on that.

But my question still remains with the remarrying of the first spouse.  I am now remarried to my first husband I know its sounds twisted but I believed that forgiveness was all I had to do to remarry my husband.  But now that I've read Deut. 24:1-4 I want to make sure that I'm not living in sin that's why I keep up with the responses I get.  And want BCV because I'm responsible for my own soul.

So again here I go.  In Matthew 5:17 Christ said he came to fulfill the Law not abolish it. Matthew 19:9 Christ said EXCEPT FOR FORNICATION committeth a sin. You've stated that the ASV. has "put way".  Lets take out "except for fornication" it would then read "Whosoever shall put away his wife, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her when she is put away  committeth adultery.  The sin is marrying one that is put away, its adultery. With the exception of fornication there would be no sin.  So even with the words put way a "bill of divorcement" isn't mentioned. But remarriage isn't a sin if put away because of fornication.  So the persons who is put way with out it be for fornication and is remarried is in an adulterous condition.

Romans:2 says that woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive.  David had Uriah killed and then married Bathsheba so he wasn't in sin there was no one Bathsheba was bound to.  He sinned but it was before he married her, not only did he sleep with another mans wife but he had him killed. And yes their first born died.

So with these explanations, I get there's no bound with fornicators or with the dead.  

John4:16 She answered correctly. Jesus said she HAS HAD five husbands, her situation of past husbands is  not given, there could have been fornication going on,could have been a widow five times, who knows, But Christ told her that the man she's with now isn't her husband and that what she said is true He let her know that he knows all things. Even the fact that she's not married.  Maybe she's "shacking", common law married, again who knows.

With all this the reasons that are given for no bound is 1Cori7:15-unbeliever wants to leave, Romans7:2-death, Matthew19:9 fornication. As with the original "bill of divorcement" both parties are able to marry another.  Even the fornicator/wrong doer/the unclean one whichever word is chosen.

Now back to Deut.24:1-4 The question still remains with the remarriage to the put away/divorced spouse.  "EXCEPT IT BE FOR FORNICATION", Would remarriage to that person bring an abomination before God?  

Answer
I deeply appreciate your desire to be right with God and your careful study of God's Word Angie. You are actually an encouragement to me by your desire to understand difficult topics of the Bible such as this one.

 I first want to address the difference between being under the New Covenant (or Testament) as opposed to being under the Old Covenant. We are no longer under the Old Covenant as Christians. Paul clearly rebukes Jewish Christians (including Peter) for attempting to bind the Old Covenant commandments to Christian converts. (see Galatians chapter 2)

 It is true that Jesus did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it. That is what Jesus Himself said, and I completely believe Him. Yet, once the Law was fulfilled, it was replaced and nailed to the cross. (Col.2:14)

 Now concerning Matt.19:9, you need to keep in mind that Jesus was correcting the Pharisees regarding divorce and remarriage under the Law of Moses. It is clear that there were two parts to divorce in the Jewish practive. A husband would "put away" his wife and he would give her a bill of divorcement. If the woman had been guilty of "fornication", there would be no need for the man to give her a bill of divorcement and he was free to remarry without committing adultery. Yet, if there was no fornication committed by the woman and he put away the wife without a bill of divorcement, then married another, he would be guilty of adultery. Why? It is because he needed to give the first wife a "bill of divorcement" before he could marry again. Study the whole passage again very carefully.

 Also, there is nothing in the Greek to indicate that the adultery is continuous or perpetual. Just as David committed adultery with Bathsheba, it was not a perpetual state.

 The passage in Romans you are referring to is actually in chapter seven and not in two. Yet, when you carefully study the whole chapter, you will see that Paul is using marriage as a parrallel to God's covenant's with man. The Law of Moses was bound to man until we die to it...through Christ. When we are water baptized, we are baptized into Christ's death and no longer bound to the Law of Moses. We are bound to Christ. The chapter is not teaching on divorce and remarriage at all.

 Yes, David had Uriah killed before he married Bathsheba, but he committed adultery before Uriah was killed. The penalty was death for both murder and adultery. David was forgiven of both. Even though Uriah was dead, the woman he committed adultery with was his wife. Does that seem to be turning away from the sin to you? How dd David repent?

 With regard to the woman at the well, you are correct that we do not know the reasons for the multiple marriages, although the fact that Jesus stated she was "with" a man who was not her husband, seems to indicate she is promiscuous. The fact remains that Jesus recognized all of the marriages.

 In conclusion, you are still attempting to bind Old Covenant law in New Covenant times. This is not possible. Remarriage to anyone would not be an abomination before God under the New Covenant system. If you are happily married to your current husband, there is no reason to divorce him. If he is now faithful to you, there is no reason to divorce him. If he beats you, you have a valid reason to divorce him. There is nothing in the New Testament nor in early church history to indicate that anyone was ever told they needed to divorce and live a celibate life in order to be right with God. Forbidding to marry is a doctrine of demons. The best way to prevent any divorce is to educate people on how to carefully choose their spouse. Unfortunately, there are no guarantees.

  I know that many in the churches of Christ disagree with me on the topic of divorce and remarriage, but I can handle that as long as God's Word does not disagree with what I teach. I seek Book, Chapter, and Verse. I seek to avoid assumptions and poor exegesis. I am not perfect. Only Jesus lived a human life sinless and without mistakes. I am happy that you have the heart that seeks to do all things according to God's will. That is commendable and a breath of fresh air. I am not sure if I have answered you adequately this time. I hope that I have, but if not, I am sure you will ask more questions. That is more than fine with me as well. I enjoy interacting with you and look forward to reading your questions. Please feel free to write more follow-ups and know that I will do my best to answer them biblically.

I wanted to add an invitation to you Angie. If you are willing and so desire, please feel free to email me directly at joetenor1066@gmail.com and we can continue to study together and learn from each other. I admire your desire to be right with God in all things and would enjoy continuing to study together on any topic. May God bless you and your family.

         Immersed Into Christ, Joe