March 3, 2010

Because the subject of divorce is so very important I have provided a wonderful analysis of Jesus’ teaching from the commentary on Mark by Tim Keller. I will be worth the effort to study the scripture and interpretation of it so that you can grasp both the gravity and the grace of Jesus’ words.

Jesus treats divorce as a tragic concession. He lays down two principles.

a) First, he stresses that “at the beginning” God intended marriage to be
exclusive and permanent (v. 6). Marriage makes two people “no longer two, but one”
and “one flesh” (v. 8) — extremely strong expressions. This is to say that marriage is far more than an association or partnership for common goals. It creates a new unit, emotionally, spiritually, personally, and even physically. The marriage bond changes you permanently and the individual loses a great measure of independence. To make it clear, Jesus adds, “let not man separate” (v. 9). This immediately undermines the more “liberal” attitude toward divorce which was being practiced by the Jewish establishment.. It must be a dire, last resort. The only way to separate any parts of “one flesh” is through amputation!

b) Second, he teaches that while God originally designed marriage to be life long, Moses’ permission of divorce was necessary “because your hearts were hard” (v. 5).This interesting statement “cuts both ways.” On the one hand, it implies that because of sin and brokenness, sometimes divorce is warranted. Jesus does not go into the proper “grounds for divorce” here. What he does say shows God’s mercy. Though he does not want divorce, he grants exceptions because he sees the misery and sin in the world. Sometimes betrayal and cruelty can damage the fabric of a marriage so that its continuance would be a greater evil than divorce. All this is implied by the idea that God through Moses granted divorce against his ideal design, as a merciful adjustment to our sinful condition. On the other hand, this means that divorce can never be looked at as a morally neutral option. It is always the result of someone’s serious sin, even if one party is mainly the victim and not the
perpetrator. There can’t be a “no fault” divorce. “Amputations” may be necessary but
they are always an “evil” and terrible thing.

We are not to ask, “what can I get away with?” That shows we don’t have the proper respect for the seriousness of the marriage institution.

Today, marriage customs reflect the view of the Pharisees (who had a liberal view of divorce) much more than the view of Jesus. The view today is that marriage is for the comfort and pleasure of both partners. Jesus sees the purpose of marriage as becoming “united.” In marriage, God’s character is to be revealed. We are to love and relate to each other as he loves and relates to us — with complete faithfulness, sacrificial commitment, and all-embracing unity.

Is Jesus over-ruling Moses and changing the Old Testament allowance for divorce?
At first glance it appears he may be doing this. In particular, his words in vv. 10-12 seem to be changing Moses’ allowance of divorce. Jesus says that “anyone,” any man or woman who divorces and remarries, is committing adultery against the former spouse and may be leading the former spouse to commit adultery. This appears to disallow divorce completely, in opposition to the Old Testament. But it is highly unlikely that Jesus is doing this. Why not?

First, Jesus has already explained that the reason Moses granted divorce was “because
your hearts were hard.” Has that reason/condition changed? Are people’s hearts less
sinful now then in past centuries? If that is the reason for divorce in the Old Testament,then that condition would have to have changed to disallow divorce. But it is certainly not the case that people are now less “hard-hearted” than in the past.

Second, nowhere does Jesus say anything like the “but I say unto you” phrase of the Sermon on the Mount (where he contradicts rabbinical tradition). Considering what we know about how Jesus upholds and honors the law of God, it doesn’t seem possible he is overthrowing Moses at this point.

Also, we know from other sources that Jesus did allow divorce on some grounds.
Matthew 19:9 tells us Jesus said, “Anyone who divorces his wife except for adultery,
and marries another woman commits adultery.” Paul also mentions desertion as
grounds for divorce in 1 Corinthians 7. So we know that Jesus and the early church did not absolutely forbid divorce.

How then can we read the seemingly categorical statement about divorce?

First, (as mentioned above) Jesus avoids discussing the specific grounds of divorce in order to stress the right attitude. He wants a high view of the sanctity of marriage. Heis really talking generally about the sinfulness of the Hillel “divorce for any cause” school. In this view, v. 11 means: “you cannot divorce for any cause as the Hillel party says. That is wrong. To do so is to indulge in adultery.” So he is speaking generally.Second, Mark is not trying here to convey all Christian teaching on divorce. He is trying to show that the Pharisees are, through their legalism, missing the broad force of the law of God. Ironically, the most legalistic people have found a way to make marriage much too easy!
Note: Some may object — ”but Jesus in v. 12 says that not only the person divorcing
sins in remarriage, but even the person who was divorced is sinning in remarriage.
Doesn’t that mean that even if divorce is allowed, remarriage never is?” But that is
probably reading v. 12 improperly. Verse 12 may not be referring to the divorced
woman. Many people think vv. 12-13 means this: “If you divorce your wife and marry
another, you commit adultery, and if the wife you divorced also remarries, she commits adultery too.” But it could just as well mean: “if any man divorces his wife and remarries, he commits adultery, and if any woman divorces her husband and remarries,she commits adultery, too.” In light of I Corinthians 7:10-15, it is fair to conclude that a person who is wrongfully divorced is free to remarry.