Okay, so I was reading through Genesis and Matthew last night, but I want to see if I’m missing anything.
From the very beginning, when God formed Eve and brought her to Adam, the whole design was for two people to become one unit. Permanently. When Jesus was confronted about why Moses allowed divorce certificates, He basically said that was a concession because people’s hearts were hard. The only grounds He actually gave for ending a marriage was sexual unfaithfulness.
Remarriage after divorce appears to be completely off the table unless your former spouse has died. Paul lays it out pretty plainly in Romans and Corinthians that a married person is bound to their spouse for as long as that person is alive, and entering a new marriage while they’re still living is adultery. The other option he gives is to reconcile with the person you originally married.
And then Paul shares his own advice about mixed-faith marriages. Basically, if your unbelieving partner is willing to stay, you don’t walk away. If they choose to leave, you let them go in peace.
What am I missing? I never really thought about it, but what does the Bible say about divorce and remarriage?
14 Likes
Your basic outline is sound. I wouldn’t lean on Romans 7 as hard as you are. Paul isn’t writing a divorce policy there. The marriage image is about being released from the law through death.
Remarriage is allowed where the prior covenant has been broken on biblical grounds, but even then Scripture doesn’t treat it as the preferred outcome. Someone can still be working to save a marriage while living somewhere else for their safety. Separation may be needed while they’re still figuring out whether divorce or remarriage is biblically justified. Ideally with a pastor and a lawyer involved.
The Bible treats marriage as a lifelong covenant.
In Matthew 19, when Jesus says ‘except for sexual immorality,’ most interpreters have taken that exception to cover remarriage as well. Otherwise the clause doesn’t change much for the person who was wronged. On 1 Corinthians 7, when Paul says the believer is ‘not bound’ if the unbeliever leaves, many take that to mean the abandoned spouse can remarry. Seeing a close friend get walked out on with no affair involved made me reconsider what ‘not bound’ means. I still think God hates divorce and we shouldn’t look for loopholes, but the text does leave more room for the innocent party than your summary allows.
1 Like
Divorce doesn’t wipe the slate clean, and remarriage doesn’t either.
The Bible treats marriage as a lifelong one-flesh bond from Genesis on, and divorce was allowed because of hard hearts. That’s why Jesus takes the Pharisees back to creation when they bring up Moses’ certificate. What that certificate did was give a written release, so the person sent away had legal standing and could marry someone else.
The Pharisees were defending any-cause divorce, and Jesus shuts that down.
If you’re still married, work for reconciliation before you leave. If you’re already in a later marriage, stay faithful there.
1 Like
‘Not bound’ is strong language, and Paul ties abandonment to being called to peace. That gives real weight to the reading that the abandoned believer is released from the marriage.
The phrase could mean they’re free to remarry, or that they don’t have to fight the separation. What in the surrounding verses makes you lean toward the remarriage reading?
5 Likes
What nudges me that way is the contrast within the chapter. In verses 10-11, Paul tells a separated believer to remain unmarried or reconcile, but in verse 15, he says the believer is ‘not bound’ and points to peace instead. That sounds like more than permission to stop chasing someone who has left. Still, he doesn’t explicitly say ‘you may remarry’ so I can see why people read it differently.
1 Like
In Matthew 19:3 the Pharisees ask whether a man can divorce ‘for any cause,’ the Hillel school’s slogan (Shammai’s side said only for sexual immorality). Jesus was stepping into a live argument, and by going back to creation he landed tougher than Shammai.
Reconciliation takes two people, and the hard heart Jesus names can belong to the spouse who won’t come to the table.
I watched a couple go through years of counseling where one of them did all the showing up. I don’t want anyone to assume the one still working was the one who failed.
1 Like
For now I read it as freedom to let the unbelieving spouse leave without guilt. I get why the other reading has some pull, since Paul does stress peace. But I’m still cautious about jumping from ‘you don’t have to hold the marriage together’ to ‘you’re free to remarry.’ The verses around it never actually say that.
If remarriage after divorce is adultery, which is how the text seems to read, what does that mean for someone’s eternal state?
Are we talking about people in ongoing sin who can still be forgiven, or is this a salvation issue?
1 Like
I’d be careful about moving from a disputed reading of remarriage to a verdict on someone’s eternal state. We’re saved by Christ, not by having every tricky passage figured out. Christians also disagree about whether a later marriage, once entered, is itself ongoing adultery. That question matters before telling someone they must end it. Seek wise pastoral counsel and take seriously any wrong done to a former spouse while staying faithful in the commitments they now have.
1 Like