I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this important subject with brother Waters. Although I believe his viewpoint is flawed and his teaching potentially destructive, I love him as a brother in Christ. I want us to "speak the same thing" and "be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Corinthians 1:10). The desire for scriptural unity in teaching and practice is my motive for participating in this Bible study (John 17:21-23).
Robert says, "I am pleased to affirm in this discussion with Thomas Thrasher that `All divorced persons may marry.'" Well, Thomas Thrasher is pleased to deny the Bible teaches that proposition! The standard I accept as authoritative is the Bible. However, in his first affirmation Robert neglected to produce even one passage of scripture that teaches "all divorced persons may marry." Since I am in the negative, I will look at every passage Robert cited in his article to see if even one of them provides proof of his proposition.
Leviticus 18:6-18. Robert refers to "the violation of Mosaic law forbidding marriage between persons of certain blood and/or legal relationship (Lev. 18:6-18)." It appears that we agree on what this passage teaches. However, Robert's proposition is not that "the Mosaic law prohibited incestuous marriages," and I am not denying that in this debate. These verses do not teach that "all divorced persons may marry." In fact, they teach that some marriages were wrong!
Leviticus 20:10, 21. "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.... And if a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shall be childless." I suppose Robert deduces from this that "all divorced persons may marry"! I fail to see any proof of that in these verses.
Ezekiel 16:38 ("And I will judge thee, as women that break wedlock and shed blood are judged; and I will give thee blood in fury and jealousy") and Mark 10:11 ("Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her") offer no support for the proposition that "all divorced persons may marry." In fact, the latter verse refers to one who marries being guilty of adultery!
Mark 5:18. Robert meant Mark 6:18 ("For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife"). This case also offers absolutely no support for Robert's proposition. Since the verse refers to a practice that was "not lawful," how does it offer proof that it is lawful for all divorced persons to marry?
1 Corinthians 5:1. "It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife." As indicated in the next paragraph, Robert claims that this is an example of an "unlawful" marriage. Therefore, how could it prove that "all divorced persons may marry"?
Robert admits some marriages are not approved by God: "The only two examples of unlawful marriages (fornication) recorded in the New Testament were cases of the man who `had his father's wife' (1 Corinthians 5:1) and Herod, who married his brother's wife (apparently after divorce) while he still lived (Mark 5:18; Lev. 20:21)." However, Robert overlooks some other unlawful marriages mentioned in the New Testament: Matthew 19:9—"... and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery" (emphasis in this and the next four passages is mine, TNT). Here are marriages that involve adultery! Are they "lawful," Robert? Matthew 5:32—"... whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery." Is this marriage lawful? Mark 10:11-12—"... Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." Are these marriages lawful? Luke 16:18—"Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery." Why aren't these marriages "unlawful"? Romans 7:3—"... if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress"). Robert, is this woman's "marriage" to another man "lawful"? Ephesians 5:22 and Colossians 3:19. Robert states: "By teaching men to `love their wives' (Col. 3:19) and women to `be in subjection' to their husbands (Eph. 5:22) he [Paul] teaches against separation and divorce." If these verses teach "against separation and divorce," they do not teach that "all divorced persons may marry." Consequently, they do not sustain Robert's proposition.
Matthew 5:17-19. "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Robert says, "Jesus … was obedient to the Law." True. However, Jesus' teaching often pointed people to a time beyond Moses' law to the arrival of His kingdom (Matthew 4:17— "From that time Jesus began to preach ... Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."). For example, He taught people about the Lord's supper (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:19-20), the new birth (John 3:3-5), and church discipline (Matthew 18:17). Although He kept Moses' law perfectly while it was still in effect, He also prepared people for service to God according to the "new testament" (Hebrews 9:15; 12:24; 2 Corinthians 3:6-11). While His life was consistent with the law of Moses, Jesus unquestionably proclaimed New Testament doctrines in anticipation of His kingdom.
Acts 15:20, 29. These verses teach that we should "abstain from ... fornication" and some other things. I wholeheartedly agree with these instructions. However, I find nothing in these verse to provide even a remote hint that "all divorced persons may marry."
Deuteronomy 24:1-4. Robert says, "The Law under which Jesus lived … made provisions for a marriage to be dissolved (Deut. 24:1-2) because of the hardness of man's heart (Matt. 19:8)." Robert uses a considerable portion of his article elaborating on what he thinks Deuteronomy 24 means. However, regardless of what the Old Testament law taught, that law is not God's law for us today!
"Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster" (Galatians 3:24-25).
"... Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt ..." (Hebrews 8:8-9).
"He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second" (Hebrews 10:9).
"... our sufficiency is of God; who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away ..." (2 Corinthians 3:5-7).
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace" (Galatians 5:1-4).
"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law" (Hebrews 7:12).
Matthew 5:31-32. "It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: but I [Jesus] say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery" (emphasis mine, TNT). Since the Lord declared marriage to this divorced person as involving adultery, it should be obvious that NOT "all divorced persons may marry"!
Matthew 19:8-9. Jesus clearly contrasts His law on divorce and remarriage with Moses' law: "He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery" (Matthew 19:8-9). I find nothing in this passage to the effect that "all divorced persons may marry." In fact, by marrying, some "commit adultery"!
1 Corinthians 7:1-2, 8-11, 26-28, 36. The apostle discusses whether or not an individual should marry; however, his remarks presuppose that the individual is scripturally eligible to marry. Paul uses expressions such as "let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband" (v. 2): "let them marry" (v. 9); "if thou marry, thou hast not sinned" (v. 28); and "he sinneth not: let them marry" (v. 36). In each of these cases, Paul's instructions assume adherence to the remainder of God's instructions given elsewhere. Nowhere in this chapter does Paul state that "all divorced persons may marry"! Nevertheless, this chapter will be discussed in some detail in a subsequent article.
1 Timothy 4:1-3. Robert argues that "forbidding to marry ... surely condemns the traditional teaching and practice of forbidding legally divorced persons to marry, or to continue in a legal marriage." Of course, Robert is mistaken in his application of "forbidding to marry" in this passage to my position on divorce and remarriage. The Bible teaches that it is right to forbid unscriptural marriages. For example, John was right in forbidding Herod's marriage to Herodias: "For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife" (Mark 6:18). It is right to forbid same sex marriages (Romans 1:26-27). It is right to forbid an already-married man from marrying a second wife (1 Corinthians 7:2). Furthermore, didn't the Lord forbid some marriages when he said, "Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery" (Luke 16:18, emphasis mine, TNT)? These marriages are the kind that God and I "forbid"!
My friend asserts that "God gave a procedure for divorcing that would allow both parties to marry another." I'm sorry, Robert, but I missed your citation of that verse in the New Testament where God gave such a procedure. I reviewed every verse that you cited in your first affirmative, but not one provided proof of this assertion.
Robert quoted part of a note on Matthew 5 taken from the website of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. However, if you look at his quotation, there is an ellipsis (...) between the words "different" and "It." The part that Robert chose to omit from the original source is as follows: "There are other sayings of Jesus about divorce that prohibit it absolutely (see Mark 10:11-12; Luke 16:18; cf 1 Cor 7:10, 11b), and most scholars agree that they represent the stand of Jesus. Matthew's `exceptive clauses' are understood by some as a modification of the absolute prohibition." In other words, they appear to be saying that Matthew 19:9 states an exception to the Lord's general prohibition against divorce and remarriage. If that is what they are saying, then I agree.
However, I do not accept the USCCB's utterances as authoritative. (Do you, Robert?) For instance, they also comment on Matthew 16:18 on the same website (http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew16.htm): "Jesus' church means the community that he will gather and that, like a building, will have Peter as its solid foundation." (Footnote 13). Does Robert agree with USCCB's view that "Peter" is the "solid foundation" of "Jesus' church"?
Brother Waters' Questions
Robert presented me with six questions in his first article. Because of space limitations, I will address three questions now and the remaining three in my next article.
1. Does divorce end a marriage? Answer: Divorce ends some marriages; death ends the rest (Romans 7:2). However, divorce does not sever the bond that God has established (Romans 7:2-3).
2. When a couple divorce how can one be free and the other not? Answer: God has "loosed" one and "bound" the other. Notice Romans 7:2-3—"For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." A person commits adultery if he (or she) divorces his wife (or her husband) for any reason other than fornication and marries someone else. The reason is that he/she is still bound (i.e., obligated) to that first wife/husband. There is a difference between the "marriage" and the "bond." In Romans 7:2-3 the woman is "married" to the second man but still "bound" to the first.
3. What is the first and primary meaning of apoluo ? Answer: According to the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Thayer, 1967), the first definition listed is "to set free ... to liberate one from a thing" (page 66). Thayer proceeds to state that the word is "used of divorce." For the definition "divorce," Thayer lists the following passages: Matthew 1:19; 5:31f; 19:3, 7-9; Mark 10:2, 4, 11; and Luke 16:18. Therefore, according to Thayer, "put away" (KJV) in these verses refers to "divorce"!
According to The Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker, 1979), the first definition listed is "set free, release, pardon ... a prisoner" (page 96). This lexicon goes on to give "divorce" as a definition, under which Matthew 1:19; 5:31f; 19:3, 7-9; Mark 10:2, 4, 11; and Luke 16:18 are listed. Consequently, "put away" (KJV) in these passages means "divorce."
Robert misrepresents my position as being "that divorced people are still married in the sight of God." That is not my position! Married people are married, and divorced people are divorced. However, God does not approve all marriages (since some are unlawful), and He does not approve all divorces (since some are unlawful), as previously demonstrated.
Nowhere in all of God's Book has my brother found proof that "all divorced persons may marry."