The Sin of Divorce

Renew America ^ | 01/04/2005 | Adam Graham

[Keyes2000mt]

The words were said countless thousands of times last year as a minister concluded the ceremony. "What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder." But so often man and woman do.

While gay marriage has been roundly condemned in most churches (and rightly so), you will not hear much about divorce. In many cases, if divorce is discussed in church, it's talked about as this horrible circumstance that comes upon people, listed in the same breath as automobile accidents or serious illnesses.

The Bible is quite clear on the issue of divorce. Malachi 2:16 says it clearly, "For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that He hateth putting away (i.e. Divorce)..." Hate's a strong word and Christ reiterates this in the New Testament. Yet, in the church, even in Conservative churches, a man is more likely to feel uncomfortable with pierced ear than with a couple divorces behind him.

There's good reason why the church and conservatives are skittish about this topic. There's no one who doesn't know someone who's been divorced. They fill our church pews every Sunday. We know them to be decent folks who agree with us on a lot of cultural issues. Randall Terry, Newt Gingrich, and Rush Limbaugh have all been divorced.

We also know folks who have been victimized by their ex-spouse: abused, cheated on, and treated like dirt. Or, perhaps you dear reader have had a divorce where you weren't at fault and that you didn't choose.

On the other hand, most Christians know very few homosexuals and even less know homosexuals who'd like to get married. The odds of a pastor offending a large tither whose gay and wants to get married is quite small.

To say our current divorce rate is a national sin is not to say that all divorcees are to be condemned and treated as despicable outcasts. The church should be compassionate, but even as Christ said, "Go and sin no more," It must be proactive in dealing with divorce.

Divorce must be taught against strongly in the church. The church as a community should be dedicated to helping preserve the marriages of the church. Strengthening the marriages of believers should be considered as important if not more so than evangelism. Children of broken homes often wander spiritually and in many cases fall from faith. Thus, a large church may win 100 converts, but if it produces 40 broken homes in the same year that leads to 100 angry and embittered children, it is not truly building the Kingdom of God.

Also, church discipline should be used when appropriate for those who divorce without just cause and refuse reconciliation efforts. Watching Cornerstone Television, I saw former NFL player and Pastor of Antioch Bible Church Ken Hutcherson. He organized the Mayday for Marriage rally in Washington, DC opposing gay marriage. Call him anything you like, but don't call him a gay-hating hypocrite. Hutcherson said that in the past year, he'd censured five members of the church, including some for ending marriages without just cause.

The structure of most Protestant Churches is anti-authoritarian and the idea of church discipline is scary to most of us as we've heard horror stories about how cults have abused it. However, desperate times call for desperate measures and a biblical use of church discipline could aid in preserving marriages.

Secular Action

The devastating number of divorces is an area where the interests of church and state collide. Studies have shown that divorces lead to economic problems for states and communities, as well as the long term problems that come from children of broken marriages. It's no accident that the richest states are those with the lowest divorce rates.

The fact is that anyone who finds themselves in a bad marriage made a mistake at one time or another. Half the time, their biggest mistake was getting married in the first place. To prevent these bad matches or to help get the marriage off on a better start, marrying couples should be required to undergo several hours of marriage classes and/or marital counseling from a licensed minister or marriage counselor.

Secondly, no-fault divorce laws must be reformed. Marriage is the most important relationship a person has legally, yet it has all the force and effect of a month-to-month lease thanks to no-fault divorce laws. The laws should be reformed so a no-fault divorce can only be obtained if both parties consent. This would also reduce the court costs associated with issues of custody and division of the property as a no-fault divorce could only be obtained if both parties were agreed on it.

Those who believe in gay marriage have pointed to divorce as an argument against those who seek to protect marriage from same sex unions. I reject the argument that one evil prospering requires that we allow another blow to traditional family values. However, preserving the family is about more than one single issue and if we're going to be serious about it, we have to address all the issues that threaten the survival of the Family.

[nopardons]

Is that Cole at 20? You should have posted the fight song,that he wrote for Yale and is still used to this day then. :-)

But Porter's use of words is far superior to anything Dylan and Willie ever wrote;combined! :-)

[sinatorhellary]

I'd also be curious about the translation of "marital unfaithfulness."

Porneia: illicit sexual intercourse
adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11

- Thayer's

[durasell]

1910!

The quality of a song is totally dependent on context. For instance, I learned this the hard way when I walked into a bar in Del Rio, Texas, looked at the jukebox and exclaimed loudly, "What the hell is wrong with you people, there's not a Cole Porter song on this thing! I want to hear some show tunes!"

[nopardons]

Shame on you,you metrosexual you. LOL

[durasell]

Ya know, I tried teaching them the lyrics to Chorus Line -- One, singular sensation, every little move she makes -- but they weren't receptive...

[sinatorhellary]

Let me get this straight. Since I'm remarried, your understanding is that I'd have to abandon my wife, my children, my family in order to "go and sin no more"? You can't possibly be serious.

Do you believe there exists any marriage which God does not condone and requires separation?

Before you answer, check

Ezra 10:10-11 "Then Ezra the priest stood up and said to them, 'You have been unfaithful and have married foreign wives adding to the guilt of Israel. Now therefore, make confession to the LORD God of your fathers and do His will; and separate yourselves from the peoples of the land and from the foreign wives.'" Was Ezra serious?

Mark 6:17-18 "For Herod himself had given orders to arrest John and to chain him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, whom he had married. John had been telling Herod, 'It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife!'" Was John serious?

And what would you advise one who was in a same-sex marriage who asked the same question as you?

If you agree with Ezra and John that their audience needed to separate from their unlawful marriage, how would a marriage that Jesus calls adulterous differ? I'm am certain that it would be a hard thing to do. Maybe that's why the Jews' reaction to Jesus' teaching on marriage/divorce/remarriage in Matt 19 was, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry."

Now, do I believe one who is in an unlawful marriage should abandon his current spouse and children? Separate from the marriage to the unlawful spouse, yes. Abandon the spouse and children to their own devices, no. One would still have responsibilities there to make sure they were provided for.

[Quix]

I'm not the least bit confident that you know and understand Jesus' heart or Moses' heart about marriage and divorce much at all.

Yes, God's standards are crucial.

I'm not at all sure that you know much about His standards in this matter.

I'm utterly convinced that you are utterly convinced that you know it all on the matter.

[Quix]

VERY WELL PUT.. THX.

[Quix]

ABSOLUTELY.

THX.

[Melas]

I rarely comment on the poster instead of the post, but this case demands an exception. You my friend, are a grade-A nutboy.

[billyboyjohn]

Qu- Heretics (and others) were killed for their opposition to the Catholic Church ... not the bible.

Bb- Isn't the "The Church" largely based on "The Bible". Of course we would need to delineate which Church is based on which Bible.

Can any rational person believe that the Bible is anything but a human document?
We now know pretty well where the various books came from, and about when they were written. We know that they were written by human beings who had no knowledge of science, little knowledge of life, and were influenced by the barbarous morality of primitive times, and were grossly ignorant of most things that men know today. For instance, Genesis says that God made the earth, and he made the sun to light the day and the moon to light the night, and in one clause disposes of the stars by saying that "he made the stars also." This was plainly written by someone who had no conception of the stars. Man, by the aid of his telescope, has looked out into the heavens and found stars whose diameter is as great as the distance between the earth and the sun. We know that the universe is filled with stars and suns and planets and systems. Every new telescope looking further into the heavens only discovers more and more worlds and suns and systems in the endless reaches of space. The men who wrote Genesis believed, of course, that this tiny speck of mud that we call the earth was the center of the universe, the only world in space, and made for man, who was the only being worth considering. These men believed that the stars were only a little way above the earth, and were set in the firmament for man to look at, and for nothing else. Everyone today knows that this conception is not true.

Qu- It was through his reading of the bible that Luther was motivated to stand up against
the Catholic Church, ... thus beginning the Protestant Reformation.

Bb- Martin Luther certainly started to get the idea.

Qu- When government has been forced to make a choice between the bible and increased
power ... the bible has always been discarded.

Bb- I Think they've worked quite closely together for a long time.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

No-fault divorce should be abolished except, as in cases such as Gabz's, violence is involved.

So, if my wife cheats on me, repeatedly, and shows no sign of repenting even though we went through the religious requirements of not one, but two Christian denominations before we got married, and afterwards we went through counseling and therapy . . . and even though she drags me through the emotional equivalent of broken shards of glass for a year while I, alone, try to save the marriage, we shouldn't be able to be divorced, easily, in the end, because a clown like you insists "no-fault divorce should be abolished" based on nothing other than your own selfish, myopic world view---because you feel bad about going to strip joints at one point in your life?

Pardon me, but you can take a long walk off a short pier. What I'd really like to reply to you would get me banned. And this still, in NO WAY, has anything to do with "conservatism."

[killjoy]

First, it is surprising how many on a conservative site genuflect to the new, permissive culture of instant gratification. America is a cultural sewer and many of you seem proud that you have done your part in America's moral meltdown.

IMHO, you completely miss one point. It takes two people to try to make things work. It doesn't matter how hard one person tries if the other is not willing to put in the same effort. Banging your head against a wall expecting results just makes your head hurt. Continuing to do it just makes you a fool. There comes a time to cut your losses and move on with your life. This has nothing to do with 'instant gratification' but has to do with not being a masochist.

[anniegetyourgun]

I'm unable to respond to your missive without going down a path that no one is going to want to hear. That's because it involves God, scripture, the sanctity of marriage, and the fact that 90% of this world is outside of body of Christ - despite their protestations that they "go to church" or call themselves Christians.

But, I suppose it is worthwhile and good of you to appeal to the masses on the grounds of civility, societal good, and general morality.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

As for commenting, don't do it in public but you can use the private reply and spew as you wish.

Based on your post, newbie, you're not worth the time nor the effort.

[Quester]

Qu- Heretics (and others) were killed for their opposition to the Catholic Church ... not the bible.

Bb- Isn't the "The Church" largely based on "The Bible". Of course we would need to delineate which Church is based on which Bible.

That which has called itself the Church (at any given point in it's history) ... was supposed to be based on the Bible.

That all which has called itself the Church (at any given point in it's history) ... has been based upon the Bible ... is not the case.

Can any rational person believe that the Bible is anything but a human document?

We now know pretty well where the various books came from, and about when they were written. We know that they were written by human beings who had no knowledge of science, little knowledge of life, and were influenced by the barbarous morality of primitive times, and were grossly ignorant of most things that men know today. For instance, Genesis says that God made the earth, and he made the sun to light the day and the moon to light the night, and in one clause disposes of the stars by saying that "he made the stars also." This was plainly written by someone who had no conception of the stars. Man, by the aid of his telescope, has looked out into the heavens and found stars whose diameter is as great as the distance between the earth and the sun. We know that the universe is filled with stars and suns and planets and systems. Every new telescope looking further into the heavens only discovers more and more worlds and suns and systems in the endless reaches of space. The men who wrote Genesis believed, of course, that this tiny speck of mud that we call the earth was the center of the universe, the only world in space, and made for man, who was the only being worth considering. These men believed that the stars were only a little way above the earth, and were set in the firmament for man to look at, and for nothing else. Everyone today knows that this conception is not true.

I don't think taht anyone argues that the Bible is a scientific textbook ... that, simply, is not it's purpose.

I also think that it is significant that even modern humanity appreciates the moral teachings of Jesus as being, largely, unparallelled in human history.

The Bible was written for the understanding of the common man ... at whatever point in history that man is found.

We view the starry night sky with the same wonder as did the ancients. We may know a bit more about the reality ... but the wonder is still the same.

Qu- When government has been forced to make a choice between the bible and increased power ... the bible has always been discarded.

Bb- I Think they've worked quite closely together for a long time.

Perhaps you do.

Unfortunately though, ... you've no evidence for this.

[sinatorhellary]

Quix / Melas -

I couldn't help but notice you did not answer the questions in my post, but instead responded with character judgement("utterly convinced you know it all") and ad hominem attack ("nutboy").

Jesus made his heart clear in the matter of marriage/divorce/remarriage by the words he spoke. We both can read and understand. Whether we accept and obey even the hard teachings of Christ is a matter of our heart.

If you have some other insight into Jesus' heart in the matter of marriage/divorce/remarriage, please share the source and content of such insight. I honestly would like to hear how you understand God's word on this subject.

And, no, I do not claim to know it all. All I know to do is read the book and believe and do what it says. If I've missed something, you'd be my friend by explaining Jesus' words on marriage/divorce/remarriage in the light of your insight.

[Ginifer]

Next time you would like to give lectures on moral values and ethics, please send mail, instead of posting your ramblings and judgmental opinions.

And another thing... you must obviously have nothing better to do than print, read, and criticize others in your leisure. I suggest looking up a church in your local neighborhood to give your sermons.