People want simple answers to their questions. Yes or no, does God’s law allow for marital divorce? Yes or no, is it lawful to exit a broken covenant? The problem with simplicity is that it can be limiting or overly restrictive. Simple answers are insufficient for complicated problems. And very often biblical doctrines and the application of those doctrines are just too complex to reduce them to simple answers. Sadly, the people who want nothing more than simple answers can rely upon sloppy theologians who make a living providing simple answers. Frequently, the outcome of simple answers for the body of Christ is division. For example, those whose simple answer is that marital divorce is always a sin create a division with those who think divorce is permissible and with those who truly understand the purpose for the components of a covenant. Have you ever examined the purpose for the components of a covenant? How many components are there? What are the functions of these components? Does a covenant exist without these components? We will just touch the surface of these questions now.
When one spouse breaks one or more conditions (a component of a covenant) of the marriage covenant their marriage partner is no longer bound by the covenant because it has been broken. For example, when a married man is addicted to pornography and he refuses to get professional help so that he can escape the addiction, he is breaking the covenant’s condition of fidelity to his wife. He is guilty of infidelity by preferring lurid images of strange women to his wife. In so doing he has broken his marital covenant with his wife–forsaking all others.
Now those who define “until death do us part” as a divine prohibition on divorce would say this situation is unfortunate for this woman, but she still must remain bound by the broken marriage covenant and to a husband who is perpetually committing infidelity. They claim that she would be committing a crime against her husband and a sin against God if she were to exercise her right to exit the broken marriage covenant. They claim that her vows are broken by her divorcing her husband—vows made in the presence of witnesses and before God.
Where to begin? Those who hold to this unbiblical and illogical position should bring forward as evidence the maxim that invalidates the conditions of a bilateral covenant. Wedding vows are made by both partners. The primary conditions being spoken in the vows are to love and cherish, and to forsake all others. Only one person needs to break these vows for the covenant to be broken. This must not be defined as a mild or moderate breaking of a major vow during a rare fit of rage or on the worst moment of ones life. Intentionality and repetitious behavior is necessary for the breaking of a covenant. Grace is the general rule for out of place indiscretions. The spouse who intentionally and repeatedly breaks the condition(s) to which they vowed is the covenant breaker. The innocent spouse is free from the covenant or free to enter a new covenant with the guilty spouse. The purpose of the conditions are to assure that both parties are protected from this kind of deception. Covenant conditions exist so that both parties will be assured of receiving the benefits for which they enter the covenant in the first place.
The purpose of a covenant is to convey one or more benefits (another component of a covenant) to both parties in the covenant. A bilateral covenant, such as the marriage covenant, conveys benefits to each party; without which, the parties would have no reason or incentive to bind themselves in a covenant. The covenant’s conditions, a second component of a covenant, assure the parties will receive the promised benefit(s) or be released from a broken covenant. The condition(s) is how a covenant obligates it’s participants. People do not unnecessarily obligate themselves. However, people will obligate themselves if there is a desired benefit for doing so. Keeping the covenant’s condition(s) allows both parties continued access to the benefit(s) they desire. So when it becomes manifest that either partner is breaking one or more conditions of the covenant, then they have effectively broken the covenant itself and are guilty of withholding the promised benefit(s); therefore, the injured covenant partner is no longer bound by the covenant, as it has been broken, freeing them to enter into a new covenant with someone who is willing and able to keep the covenant conditions by providing the promised benefit.
The Believer and Their Unfaithful Spouse Vs The Church and Their Unfaithful Member
Inexplicably, the church has decided to ignore the rules by which a bilateral covenant is governed. The traditional stance on marriage covenants is to ignore the breaking of conditions. In essence, the church requires those who break the conditions of their marriage covenant to go stand in the corner for five minutes and think about what they’ve done. If the offender says, “No” and continues breaking the conditions, then the church does nothing or excommunicates them from the church, but they refuse to let the spouse excommunicate them from the marriage. When the church can divorce these offenders from the covenant that they have entered into with them but the innocent spouse cannot, this is duplicitous. This unrepentant professor of the faith cannot be allowed to pollute the church, but according to much of church tradition, the unrepentant spouse has unfettered access to their believing spouse. They not only pollute their believing spouse, but they “revile the things which they do not understand; and the things which they know by instinct, like unreasoning animals, by these things they are destroyed…these are grumblers, finding fault, following after their lusts; they speak arrogantly, flattering people for the sake of gaining and advantage” (Jude 10 & 16). No distinction should exist here. Believing spouses are part of the body of Christ and if the church can excommunicate them, then the believing spouse can divorce them. Do these godly spouses not deserve the same protection as the rest of the church?
The Idea That Forgiveness Means No Divorce Is Horrific
Some will argue that as believers in Christ Jesus we should follow God’s example by forgiving our spouses even when they break the conditions of the marriage covenant? This of course restricts divorce more severely than Christ Himself who gave us the exception clause: “except in the case of pornia” (a term with broad meaning but surely encompassing adultery). In addition, God forgiving covenant breakers is a false argument because it is not what God does. God sends unrepentant sinners (covenant breakers) to eternal damnation—“away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power” (2 Thes. 1:9). God only enters into a covenant relationship with covenant keepers as divine forgiveness comes with regeneration and transformation that secures the saints in Christ’s holiness. These cannot break the covenant conditions because Christ has kept them on their behalf. For by grace you have been saved.
A believing spouse is, in fact, commanded by God to forgive their godless spouse, but forgiveness does not mean no consequences. The argument that forgiveness takes divorce off the table for the believing spouse is no where to be found in Scripture. In the same way, an argument that loving your unbelieving spouse removes the option of divorce is also unbiblical. Divorce is God’s provision for the protection of the innocent, believing spouse. Divorce is also a punitive, restoration action for the unbelieving spouse. Protecting the believing spouse and punishing the unbelieving, rebellious spouse cannot guarantee restoration, but it is the last human effort that can be made toward their restoration. Once divorce has been applied, the believing spouse can remain single until it become clear whether or not the unbelieving spouse repents and believes. But their is no biblical mandate to do so. The believing spouse is free to remarry in the Lord. The marriage covenant was broken by the unbelieving spouse, and the marriage can be legally dissolved by a divorce action regardless of who files. The innocent spouse is neither implicated nor exonerated by filing or having the ungodly spouse file the divorce action. This is why God never called divorce a sin. Divorce DOES NOT destroy marriages. Divorce was mercifully provided by God in the Old Testament to acknowledge that the marriage has been destroyed by the spouse who broke the conditions of the marriage covenant. And God provided divorce to protect the innocent spouse from their hard-hearted, covenant breaking spouse.
One of the more inaccurate statements we have heard from the lips of many Christians is, “There are no innocent spouses.” These confuse innocence with perfection. There are indeed no perfect spouses, but innocent spouses abound. The innocent spouse is the intended beneficiary of God’s designs for marital divorce. Innocent spouses are among the weak, orphans and widows who need the protection of God and the love and acceptance of the body of Christ.
God’s Covenant With His Children Vs The Marriage Covenant
The covenant that God enters into with His children is a unilateral covenant, which is to say that God keeps the covenant on behalf of His beloved children…thank God, for we could not. The covenant between God and His children is perfect as God is perfect, and its conditions and blessings are all intact. Not only does God give his children the righteousness of Christ, which maintains their good standing in their covenant with God, but God also places His Holy Spirit within them to cause them to walk according to His statutes and he empowers each of them to observe his ordinances (Ezekiel 36:27). So the reality is that each of God’s chosen children are keepers of all of the conditions of the covenant of salvation. As a result both parties of the brides covenant with Christ will receive the blessings for which they entered the covenant.
God is and will be fully glorified and shown to be worthy of all praise, and His chosen vessels of mercy will receive salvation and an eternity as the children of God. God guarantees both parties blessings by keeping all of the conditions of the covenant. Neither party must languish in and serve a broken covenant; all the while, providing blessings to their spurious partner while being defiled and derided by that same person, which is precisely what the anti-divorce crowd insists upon for the innocent spouse. Many Old Testament passages depict God decrying Israel’s (God’s bride) unfaithfulness. Through captivities and exiles God disciplines His bride trying to get her to be faithful but His efforts were to no avail. Ultimately God divorces Israel for her unfaithfulness (Jeremiah 3:8, Isaiah 50:1)). Then God takes a bride who remains faithful because she wears the white garments washed by the blood of Jesus Christ. The righteousness of Christ keeps her faithful.
God would not remain in a broken covenant with wicked Israel or with the more wicked Judah because God knows that light and darkness cannot come together just as there can be no partnership between righteousness and lawlessness. As Christ has no harmony with ungodliness or destruction and the temple of God cannot be in agreement with idols, neither can a believer share a life in common with an unbeliever in any relationship, especially marriage. Most in the church have made the tremendous error of causing man to serve the institution of marriage rather than allowing marriage to serve man.
The Idea that Long-suffering Means No Divorce
Those who claim that divorce is always a sin would argue that Christians must follow the law of love and endure their unfaithful partner with long-suffering because their reward in heaven will be great. Their reward in heaven will be great because Jesus has won it for them. Having long-suffering for the brethren, as taught in 1 Corinthians 13, is not at issue in a marriage to an unbelieving spouse. Believers suffer the imperfections of one another because it is the loving thing to do and because each one remains imperfect as long as they are in the flesh, but believers are commanded to separate themselves from the unrepentant because bad company corrupts good morals, because a believer and an unbeliever have nothing in common, because Ezra’s godly example demands as much, and because God did so to Israel and Judah.
The damage inflicted upon the innocent, believing spouse, oppressed by “Christian” legalism and the tyranny of the weaker brother, to remain in an unequally yoked marriage with the threat of God’s eternal wrath is awful indeed. Remaining in a broken marriage covenant forces the innocent spouse into an unrighteous arrangement. Their wicked spouse has broken the conditions of the covenant effectively negating the benefits promised to the innocent spouse while the innocent spouse is expected to keep providing the benefits to the wicked spouse without reciprocity or peace in the home.
These wicked spouses are even more evil than the person who claims to have purchased a new house, who has taken possession of the house, who has placed their name on the deed, who has promised to pay for the house, but who has failed to pay so much as a penny and has no intention of ever paying for the house that they are effectively trying to steal from the original home owner. In fact, if this person then gutted the house of all it’s woodwork, marble and granite, heater, air conditioner, the chandeliers and lamps, the windows, the appliances, and even striped the electrical wiring, the pluming and the landscaping plants before they were finally evicted, then this illustration of the wicked spouse would be more precise.
Matthew Henry highlighted an additional evil when he said that the children in an unequally yoked marriage will receive an undue influence from the unbelieving spouse because the children come into the world slaves to unrighteousness, which causes them to feel a greater kinship with their unbelieving parent. In addition, the believing spouse will be discouraged in their own sanctification efforts, and the children will be encouraged to sin without consequence, seeing that their unbelieving parent is more often than not rewarded for taking tremendous advantage of the believing spouse.
Another sad reality of the position that says the dissolution of an unequally yoked marriage is always a crime against man and a sin against God is that it gives the appearance of turning the unbelieving marriage partner into the innocent victim while at the same time slandering the name and reputation of the believing spouse who has kept the conditions of the marriage covenant often for years or decades without receiving God’s intended benefits, which were promised by the unbelieving spouse, but wickedly withheld. The obedient child of God is turned upon and torn to pieces by the very people (other Christians) who should be most supportive as in the days of Ezra. Sadly another occasion for the axiom that “Only Christians shot their wounded”.
By seeking a divorce the obedient child of God is following God’s command not to be in any unequally yoked relationship (1 Cor. 7:12-16; 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1; Ezra 10: 3, 11; Judges 3:6-8; Deut. 21:10-14; Psalm 89:38-45), yet he/she will be portrayed, through the tyranny of the weaker brother, as the offender against God and man all because the church has failed to recognize that breaking the conditions of the covenant effectively ends the marriage covenant.
The traditional doctrinal view has been that the breaking of the covenant’s conditions by an unrepentant spouse is unfortunate, but it is the person who pursues relief through God’s provision of divorce that is the actual covenant breaker. This doctrinal view is unbiblical, illogical and totally deplorable. Marriage is a bilateral covenant between one man and one woman. Bilateral covenants include benefits and conditions to guarantee those benefits. Once one spouse breaks the conditions, the benefits to the innocent spouse are denied or destroyed and the bilateral marriage covenant is broken and no longer intact. The divorce action simply recognizes the offense and its subsequent damage to the innocent spouse and releases the innocent spouse so that they will be free to marry someone who will keep the conditions and provide the benefits of marriage faithfully.
So then, is it lawful to leave a broken covenant? The answer found in God’s word and by eminent reason is an emphatic YES. It is a fools errand to remain in a broken covenant. Having said that, the answer found in many Christian circles is “no”. Their advise is that you made your bed and now you must lie in it. Let the reader decide whether or not they prefer the approbation of God or the praise of men. But as for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord…all of us.
Biblical View on Divorce For the Unequally Yoked 
May 1st, 2024 at 5:37 PM
After their spouse divorced them, what options are there for those who repent of breaking the covenant? How does one repent of breaking the covenant?
May 2nd, 2024 at 10:57 PM
Johnathon,
Covenant breaking is not the unforgivable sin, so repentance is available. Repentance does not mean we can undo the damage done. Breaking a marriage covenant is much like shattering an expensive vase. It cannot be unshattered, but the married couple does have the option to repair the issues leading up to the adultery and form a new marriage covenant, which would not have to include a new marriage license if they never obtained a divorce. The new covenant is between them and does not require state approval. Some couples do not know how much they loved one another until something awful, like adultery, happens. Such marriage bonds have been made stronger by tragedy…repentance would be part of that process. Nevertheless, if the innocent spouse had valid grounds for divorce and has remarried or is engaged, then trying again is not an option. If both spouses are still single and true repentance has been realized, then dating and eventually remarriage is a possibility also. The covenant breaker can eventually remarry if their spouse divorced them for breaking the covenant, but they need to do business with God and work on themselves first.
I’ve written in one or more articles that two Christians should not divorce even if one of them commits adultery when they are in love and had a strong, satisfying relationship. They should work through it together. However, the innocent spouse has Biblical grounds for divorce, so the offending spouse has no standing to demand anything from the innocent spouse. I would add that the majority of the Christian church does not have a biblical gospel. Therefore, many people are not actually in Christ even though they are formal Christians. If just one spouse is in Christ, then their marriage is unequally yoked. I know of marriages where the believer felt trapped in their unequally yoked marriage and their unbelieving spouse wouldn’t love them but also wouldn’t divorce them, and the believing spouse eventually began a relationship with someone else and it was the believer who committed adultery. Believers do not loose their salvation for any sin including adultery. And they can repent, but they need to strongly consider divorcing the unbeliever. Had they done so earlier they would not have committed adultery.
Getting back to your specific question; I will ask you a rhetorical question: How do we repent of any sin? We confess it, we figure out what additional sins lead up to it and we begin turning from every sinful thought, word or action that would cause us to sin in that way again. For instance, people don’t just one day have sex with a stranger. They have a habit of lust in their mind, sometimes a porn problem they are hiding, or they entertain a friendship that they have no business getting involved in as a married person and sooner or later they fail to honor the marriage bed…they break their marriage covenant. So every sin that led up to adultery must be discovered and repentance had.
Johnathon, feel free to provide more details if I have not answered your question completely. This comment section is good for readers, but if you want greater privacy we can use emails.
Christ’s Continued Blessings,
Joe
December 28th, 2023 at 7:59 AM
Thanks for the article! Can I ask where in the bible it says marriage covenants are broken prior to the writ of divorcement? I appreciate your article.
December 28th, 2023 at 9:09 AM
Katie,
Thanks for the question. I encourage people to have Merriam Websters dictionary beside them when they read their Bibles. We need to understand the full meaning of words that we do not currently understand. People often think they understand the meaning of many words, but they would be surprised to find out the complete meaning of words if they looked them up. The Bible is inerrant and infallible, but it is not a dictionary. You need a dictionary to aid your lack of knowledge about many words. I practice this myself. I often look up key words that I already know the meaning, and Webster’s definitions help me well beyond my own understanding of these words. Then with certain words, such as ‘covenant’ you may need to do further study to discover their full meaning. Covenants have several components, such as benefits, conditions, a symbol, a ceremony, promise(s), perhaps I’m leaving one out. Ever watch the movie “Its a Wonderful Life”? When the character ‘Martini’ is buying a house in ‘Bailey Park’ the lender (Baileys Building & loan) performs a ceremony on the steps of the house. The symbols are the wine and the bread provided by Mrs. Bailey. The benefits to the Martini family is living in a house they have not paid for yet and for Baileys Building & loan, receiving interest on the loan. The condition for the Martinis is to make monthly payments on time, and for Baileys is to allow the Martinis to live in the house not yet paid in full. These conditions are also the promises. Now what if Mr. Martini stopped paying his monthly payments? He would be breaking his promise and the primary condition of the covenant. If he refused to meet this obligation, then the Baileys Building & Loan would have to foreclose and evict the Martini family. The breaking of the covenant is not done by Baileys Building & Loan when they foreclose on the loan and evict from the house (equivalent action to divorce). No, the covenant was broken when Martini stopped meeting his obligation to keep his promises and meet the necessary condition of making his monthly payments. A marriage covenant is broken when one or both parties break the conditions of ‘to love and to cherish, and to forsake all others’. The divorce is necessary to declare to the rest of the world that the marriage covenant has been broken. But once a spouse stops receiving the promised benefits that caused them to enter the marriage in the first place, then they must confront their marriage partner to see if they are willing to reignite their love for them or will they obstinately withdraw their love forever? Or perhaps have they began to love another instead of their own spouse? Either action is treachery to the marriage relationship and breaks the marriage covenant and divorce has not been so much as discussed yet. Most marriages, at one time or another, are broken by at least one of the two married partners. They simply stop loving their spouse for any number of reasons. But if the injured party confronts the unloving spouse they frequently wake them up out of a foolish condition and the two fall in love all over again. The marriage is better than it had been for years and in essence the couple enter into a new marriage covenant under the old marriage license. These never needed to divorce because repentance was made and love was restored. But the covenant was broken for a period of time without a divorce taking place. The condition of loving and cherishing was not being met. Conditions must be met or the covenant is broken. But not all broken covenants have to end in divorce. Only in cases of an unforgiving spouse or an obstinate spouse does divorce become necessary. For the record, the injured spouse should forgive the obstinate spouse, but that does not preclude divorce. It is foolish for a spouse to stay in a marriage relationship where they will be forever starved of love and affection. This is a person who does not love or respect themselves enough to hold their spouse to the high standard intended in marriage covenants.
Marriage covenants are bilateral covenants between two equal parties. They operate as I stated above. The Bible speaks frequently about God’s covenant with the Israelites, and later with Christians. God’s covenant with His people is a unilateral covenant. That means that their are no conditions for His children to keep. Once they are His children, they cannot break the marriage conditions with God because God keeps them for them. Jesus dying on the cross for us paid our conditions up front. So it is actually impossible to break our covenant with God if we are indeed in a covenant with God. Most who call themselves “Christians” are not actually in Christ. Christians have regularly failed to distinguish between unilateral and bilateral covenants to their own detriment. If we enter a bilateral covenant with another person and then treat it like a unilateral covenant with God, then we are setting ourselves up for a world of hurt and agony. Another person will rarely act like God. People need covenants to force them to behave. If you told men they could sleep with as many women as they wanted and have no negative consequences, including God would not see it as a sin, then how many of them do you think would remain faithful to their wives? No negative consequences means that the God, the church, wives and children continue to respect and love this man no matter how many young women he is sleeping with on a regular basis. You see, Katie it is the negative consequences of sin that makes human beings be as obedient as they are and still they really are not that obedient. Divorce is a negative consequence of sin. The sin is breaking your marriage covenant with your spouse. The consequence of that sin may very well be a marital divorce. This is why God provided divorce in Deuteronomy 24. If divorce was prohibited as the church generally assumes, then the innocent spouses would have no protection against perniciously obstinate spouses. Thanks to God’s gracious allowance for divorce, an innocent marriage partner can free themselves from such marriages and enter into a new marriage with a promise keeper.
Christ’s Continued Blessings,
Joe
November 24th, 2023 at 7:08 AM
Why did John the Baptist refer to Herodias as “Philip’s wife” and literally lose his head stating it was unlawful for Herod to have her? Pretty likely Herodias broke her covenant with Philip somewhere along the way and also pretty likely Philip, being Herod’s brother, broke his covenant to Herodias before her departure to Herod.
Divorce if you must but don’t expect a pass from God if your intent is to try again with someone new unless you covenant spouse had died.
November 24th, 2023 at 8:19 PM
Ben,
I greatly appreciate the brevity of your question. Though I disprove your logic, you will continue to hold the same opinion. I know this as surely as I know that I cannot help my many close friends stuck in Rome’s works based system of forgiveness to come to the Biblical understanding that salvation is sola scriptura, sola Christus, sola fide, sola gratia and soli Deo gratia. In both instances people have accepted, supported and willingly participated in these unbiblical institutions and passed them along for centuries. Both Catholicism and the ‘no divorce ever’ systems are founded in misinterpretations of the Scriptures, which makes them unassailable in the minds of those brought up under these manmade traditions. If Catholicism is Jezebel, then the no divorce ever doctrine is Athaliah (Jezebel’s daughter who married King Jehoshaphat’s son and soon murdered the entire royal family taking the thrown for herself) because it was born out of the Catholic doctrine of seven sacraments; hence, the two doctrines are closely related.
During the Reformation two reformers tried to reclaim the Biblical teaching allowing divorce and remarriage when appropriate, but centuries of the Catholic doctrine on marriage as a sacrament created a deeply held Christian tradition albeit unbiblical. This Catholic tradition made the permanence of marriage doctrine the Protestant view as well as the Catholic view because in part the reformers were all previously Catholic, and the Christian world was use to viewing divorce as a mortal sin. The two reformers who attempted to correct this mistake at the time of the Reformation were Martin Bucer (1491-1551) and Paulus Fagius (1504-1549), and they did so without knowing the other was writing similar corrections. A century later the Puritan author of Paradise Lost, John Milton (1608-1674) tried to recover the Biblical allowance for Christian divorce and remarriage. He also did so prior to discovering that Bucer and Fagius worked toward reversing the damage done by the false doctrine of marriage being a “Holy Sacrament”. We do not know how many theologians have tried to overturn this false doctrine between Milton’s 17th Century and our own 21st Century, but I am certain that many have tried. The three men mentioned above should have been more than enough for the rest of God’s children to stand up and take notice. Their lights being so much brighter than my own. But I have the Worldwide Web on my side, so who knows if God has waited until now to move the Body of Christ back under Biblical truth on this doctrine.
Ben, to respond to your specific concern: John the Baptist referred to Herodias as Philip’s wife because she was Philip’s wife and Philip was Herod’s brother. An Old Testament law applied to Herod’s taking his brother’s wife. John the Baptist was correct, it was unlawful for Herod to have his brother’s wife, but not because of divorce and remarriage. Leviticus 20:21 says, “If there is a man who takes his brother’s wife, it is abhorrent; he has uncovered his brother’s nakedness. They will be childless.” Herod was openly flaunting this law and John the Baptist was the last of the Old Testament prophets, so he would naturally call a Jewish King to repent of such a public sin against the Law of God. No place in Mark 6 (your passage) is the word ‘divorce’ so much as mentioned, even though both Herod and Herodias both had previous divorces. John said, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” He was correct.
Ben, I started on your side of this issue. Then I determined to study the issue using Scripture alone to see what God had to say about divorce and remarriage. So I threw everything out of my mind. I wanted nothing but God’s word and the Holy Spirit to be my guides on what the heart of God was on the doctrines of divorce and remarriage. As long as I had no presuppositions muddying the waters it was very easy to see that the church was far more restrictive on divorce and remarriage than God. In fact, God divorced Israel and Judah because they were guilty of not being faithful to God. As a result of the Bible demonstrating God’s allowance for divorce and remarriage, every argument prohibiting it come in the form that yours has come to me, which is that people use passages in the Bible that say absolutely nothing about divorce. I understand, if they refuse to let go of the traditions of men, then they have no alternative since no biblical passages exist that say a Christian cannot get a divorce and remarry and at least two say that you can.
And dear brother Ben, if indeed you are regenerate, God’s children have gotten a pass from God purchased for us by the blood of Christ! It is not a pass to sin freely, by no means, but we are no longer under the Law. And even the Old Testament children of God who were under the Law were given access to a permit of divorce (Deuteronomy 24). On one hand, God has commanded Christians not to be bound together with unbelievers (2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1). On the other, man-made traditions claim that God denies Christians the access to repent of their unequally yoked marriages. I’ll obey God’s word and you obey the traditions of men and we’ll let God commend us or correct us in the life to come. But our fruit will be much greater when we obey the commands of God, and when we are bound together in marriage to fellow saints. One of my favorite synonyms for sin is “to miss the mark”. We sin or miss the mark when we transgress a law of God. We also miss the mark when we restrict what God has permitted. God does not want His children married to the children of Satan.
Christ’s Blessings,
Joe
August 3rd, 2023 at 11:46 AM
I have a question. I feel that I understand and agree with I think everything you are saying. Based on what you’ve said and the principles laid forth. What would you say if a covenant was broken, but then both parties chose to reconcile? Does the broken covenant become renewed ? What if the innocent party decides to excersize their right to leave years later after both agreeing to stay together and the offender was repentant (all was forgiven, a commitment to stay together was recognized by both people, and there was never another offense)? I would think you can’t participate in the benefits of the covenant for years when it was renewed and then say it’s still broken years later to get out of the marriage.
August 3rd, 2023 at 4:11 PM
Jordan,
This is a difficult question. If this is a hypothetical question, then your reasoning appears to be quite solid; however, if it is a real life question that you or someone you know is experiencing, then more details would need to be provided. As I understand covenants and the Scriptures, I would say that the original covenant, being broken, is no longer in force and cannot just be renewed. A new covenant would need to be entered into to bring the previously married couple together again. No elaborate ceremony would be necessary. It could be like renewing of your vows, only with a bit of a twist, that not all guests would need to be privy. First however, for a limited, but not predetermined or set period of time, the married partners should live under the broken covenant while both sides determine a willingness to enter into a new covenant with one another. Vast numbers of people live in broken covenants because it can be too costly (financially, emotionally, physically, familial) to extricate oneself from a marriage. This period of time provides the innocent spouse sufficient evidence that the offending spouse has genuinely repented and is on a path of obedience to God’s laws. It also allows time to determine whether or not the innocent spouse can resume the necessary trust and affection for someone who has hurt them in such a personal way. Infidelity effectively breaks the marriage covenant whether or not a divorce is obtained. Taking this substantial break from one another will drive that consequence home and allow both parties to realize the significance of what has happened to their marital union. It is entirely inappropriate for one spouse to say, “My bad” and expect to get right back into the previous marriage relationship. That marriage relationship is dead. Nevertheless, if both are able to heal from this abrupt dissolution of the marriage, brought upon them by the unfaithful spouse, and come to realize that they still love one another and still desire to be together, then they can slowly move toward entering a new marriage covenant.
Taking up separate residences would be very helpful if it is financially feasible. This allows both ex spouses to see how God is working with them without the distraction of everyday interaction with one another. Being separate allows these two to determine whether or not they would marry this person all over again if given the chance. But most important is the ability to petition God for His will in the relationship. Both should be drawing closer to God. This should be evident. The couple cannot have a Christian marriage if both are not truly in Christ Jesus. If this longer process is followed, and both demonstrate obvious love for God and obedience to His commands, then they should want to renew their marriage covenant (enter into a new one) and live happily every after. Taking the time and doing the work necessary to determine God’s will should alleviate any need to have the innocent spouse change their mind years later and claim they have a right to exit the marriage. All of this can be done while living in the same house as well, but separate sleeping quarters and abstinence should likely be followed during this time of contemplation and perhaps some dating each other of course when both are ready. Speeding this process up can very easily lead to the the scenario you put forward in your question. Remarriage in this scenario should be taken as seriously as getting married to a total stranger.
Let me know if I can be of further assistance. I want you to know that great questions like yours are read by hundreds if not thousands of readers (not sure what percentage read Q & A) and can benefit large numbers of people sharing your concern.
Christ’s Continued Blessings,
Joe
August 9th, 2022 at 1:04 PM
Holy moly I have never read something so well said you are so on point!! in this article needs to get absolutely everywhere because it is sickening how many Christians believe the falseness of staying in a broken marriage!!! You literally have said everything I always feel and try to fight others on and they don’t understand me and you said it perfectly!! I love you God bless you!!!
August 9th, 2022 at 7:57 PM
Tia,
Your kind words are greatly appreciated.
Christ’s Continued Blessings Dear Sister,
Joe
September 19th, 2021 at 2:52 AM
Adam,
You may, in your unnecessary condescending and snarky (sarcastic) tone [your words], characterize breaking the conditions of a covenant as a simple answer, but it is not. Further, you will find no simple answers in this article, which you may not have bothered to read as you failed to comment on anything beyond the first two paragraphs. It is true that in the first two paragraphs no scriptural passage was provided since all of Scripture supports this premise. By way of an example, covenant breakers will not inherit eternal life, which you may have learned had you finished reading the rest of the article.
By saying the covenant is before God you are saying it is entered into with God as witness to it. We would ask, what takes place amongst God’s creation that He does not witness? If God witnesses all, then saying that God witnesses covenants in no way changes how they function. Covenants, by definition are merely agreements which is really our point. Covenants have several components for good reason. Each component of the covenant is necessary and has great significance. You cannot just eradicate the component of conditions because it negates marriage as an idol unless you want to continue the idolization of marriage. As a necessary component of a covenant, remove the conditions and their purpose and you no longer have a covenant. In other words, the covenant ceases to be a covenant if it lacks conditions because the conditions are a necessary part of covenants. It is not necessary that you like this, but you logically have to accept it. Unsurprisingly, the idolatry of marriage is destroyed by the covenants’ conditions, which is as as Scripture and logic would have it. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus commanded us to make no vows, and you will not find your statement (“…the [marital] vows are to God–they are 100% independent on the other person’s failure or success) supported anywhere in Scripture because first, no such passage exists and second, your statement is contrary to Scriptural teaching. Jesus’ pornia clause alone demonstrates as much. Paul’s “if the unbelieving spouse leaves, the believer is not bound” clause is another.
You would do well to think deeply on Biblical doctrines rather than continuing to peddle adopted presuppositional positions unsupported in Scripture. Being critical of propositions prior to understanding them highlights the ignorance of your position. “Also it is not good for a person to be without knowledge, and he who hurries his footsteps errs” (Proverbs 19:2).
Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees,
Joe
May 31st, 2022 at 10:28 AM
Joe, I see you’ve perceived snarky tone and then attempted to reply in kind. Beautiful attempt to be like Christ, my on-line acquaintance. (There is sarcasm there)
I would recommend you do a little more studying of the Scripture before you make statements like “covenant breakers will not inherit eternal life.” That was misguided at best and foolish at worst, but either way, it is inaccurate in light of Scripture, for God forgives sin, even those who sin by breaking a covenant.
Secondly, I would not assume, as you have, that God witnesses all – Habakkuk 1:13 clearly indicates otherwise, and of course, when Jesus took upon Himself all the sin of the world, God turned His back, for that very reason. If you have any theological training, and you’ve paid for it, I would request my money back, if I were you. (Again, that’s sarcasm, because I like to keep things lighthearted).
I wish you all the best, and I think anyone who stumbles upon this thread would benefit from observing this engagement. At the risk of answering a fool according to his folly, I think it’s better than letting him be wise in his own eyes… It’s not idolatry of marriage, but idolatry of individuality that is plaguing the church in America. May the Lord strengthen those who have rightly divided His Word and may He also silence those who speak and write contrary to His commands.
Blessings,
Adam
May 31st, 2022 at 12:57 PM
Hello again Adam. Nice to hear from you. It is greatly appreciated that you shared with me the motivation for your sarcasm–it really helps me to better understand you and your communication style. I stand by my statement that “covenant breakers will not inherit eternal life”. Context is very important. You pulled my statement out of it’s context, which does bring it into question. However, the following two paragraphs add the necessary context to fully understand my statement. God keeps both ends of the covenant He has entered into with us, so none of His children are covenant breakers. God’s children may have broken bi-lateral covenants with one another and God forgives us for those broken covenants, but anyone who is not covered by the covenant of Grace is, in essence, a covenant breaker of the covenant of Grace and will not inherit eternal life.
The reality that God will not punish any who are in Christ for sin is a reality because He has already punished the Lord Jesus Christ for our sin. This does not mean that God does not see our sin. Omniscience means that God knows and sees all. It is a destructive doctrine that leads people to believe God does not see their sin. Another biblical passage is similar: 2 Thessalonians 1:9 says, “These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.” Omnipresence means that God is everywhere, which includes hell. Yet this passage says “away from the presence of the Lord”. Just as I would not use this passage to deny God’s omnipresence, I would not use Habakkuk 1:13 to deny God’s omniscience.
No doubt much plagues the church in America. Every form of idolatry including marriage and individuality plague the people of God. In the past few months, God has been kind enough to me to show me some idols I brought into the temple. Even God’s institutions such as the Sabbath and marriage can be turned into idols that we must serve rather than allowing them to be a blessing in our lives. Amen to your final line.
Christ’s Continued Blessings Adam,
Joe
August 15th, 2021 at 12:40 PM
Appreciate this article and the truth in it. After 10 years of manipulation, blaming and accusing, gaslighting, lies, etc and constant bombardment of unrighteous behaviors i didn’t know what to do. I kept thinking “a wife shall not depart from her husband” as my reasoning to stay. While my very being was crushed. I went to God about it. He saw what was going on. And to my dismay He told me that I will be his helpmeet. He directed me to return his ugly behaviors with kindnesses. I did everything the Holy Spirit directed me to do though I did not understand because nothing changed. God asked me only to Be Still. I was obedient. Then one day through scripture and an article that speaks to the marriage covenant as likened to how the Israelites broke their covenant with God. Likewise my husband has broken our marriage covenant. God showed me this. I was free from that moment I saw the truth in my husband had broken the covenant and I was free. Sometimes with God’s people he makes finding His will by connecting truths. Rather than outward blunt words. Because He hides His truth and understanding from unbelievers. I got stuck on ‘a wife shall not depart from her husband’ not understanding he was not my husband anymore because of his breaking the covenant. Not sure this is written well enough to make sense. I hope it does.
August 15th, 2021 at 2:02 PM
Donna,
Thank you for offering your experience to all the people who are enduring very similar experiences due to their being bound to unbelievers. Well done in showing the progression of your obedience to God and His providential hand in guiding you along in love allowing you to first obey and then gain greater light so that you can be free. “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not receive many times as much at this time and in the age to come, eternal life” (Luke 18:19-30). God already knows the blessings He has for you in the future. A believing husband who will truly love and cherish you is my prayer for you.
Some teach that the passage we referenced a moment ago does not refer to believers leaving unbelievers. They argue that it is believers going on missionary journeys and making personal sacrifices in their relationships and occupations. This cannot be a correct interpretation because in a parallel passage in Mark 10:28-30, Mark adds that Christ’s temporal blessings for leaving our godless relationships when appropriate include “houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms, along with persecutions” (verse 30). My own Christian mother was much closer to me than my biological mother. My Christian brothers and sisters are much closer to me than my biological ones. It is true that going into the Lord’s service often takes us geographically away from our nearest kin, but certainly the spouse would go along in missionary travel. Martyn Lloyd-Jones refused to accept any invitation to speak anywhere away from home if the invitation did not include his wife. He believed that a believing marriage meant that they were one and therefore should even travel together.
Christ’s Continued Blessings,
Joe
August 15th, 2021 at 2:51 PM
Thank you for replying! I appreciate it. And I covet your prayer for me. Thank you.
Also, I went to the MLJ Trust and listened to a sermon. Just excellent!! Don’t hear sermons like that very often. So glad you mentioned his name.
August 15th, 2021 at 4:06 PM
Donna,
My Pleasure. I am hear to serve. I listen to at least 2-3 sermons by MLJ every Sunday and usually some during the week as well. MLJTrust.org has over 1,600 sermons from this great preacher. I personally believe him to be among the very best of preachers from the 20th century. We love him very much and are supporters of his trust headed by his grandson. Listen to his Friday evening sermon series such as Romans because they are particularly intended for the body of Christ. Whereas his Sunday Morning sermons were heavily gospel centered as his London church was large and many visitors came from all over the world.
Christ’s Continued Blessings,
Joe
March 29th, 2021 at 9:43 AM
My question for the commentator is this; what does God do to us when we break covenant with him (Spiritual harlotry)? Does God cast us away in divorce and take another? What about the prodigal son, did the father give up on the son? How many times did Jesus tell his disciples to forgive their brother? If adultery of the heart is ground for divorce, then who among us is not guilty?
March 30th, 2021 at 10:15 AM
Brian,
We, those in Christ, cannot break covenant with God. It is impossible. God keeps both sides of our covenant with Him. He keeps His promises to us and Jesus has paid the price for our end of the covenant. That is why we recognize that we are saved by grace and not works. Second, you ask whether or not God casts us away to take another. My first answer takes care of this concern as well; however, as we look at the visible church we realize that most are not actually “in Christ” and those will be cast away as our Lord has said, “Many shall call upon me, Lord, Lord and I shall reply to them, ‘depart from me you who practiced lawlessness'”. Third, you wrote a question about how many times Jesus instructed us to forgive our brother. Forgiveness does not mean their will be no consequences. Many have sat in court gazing into the face of the person who killed their loved one and told them they forgive them. Yet these family memebers are still in agreement with the murderer spending the remainder of their life in prison. Forgiving a covenant breaker does not make the covenant intact once again. Entering again or remaining in a broken covenant with an unbelieving covanant breaker is foolish and disobedient to God’s command and will. Finally, I made no arguement that adultery of the heart amounts to a biblical ground for divorce. In fact, I do not think that physical adultery is always grounds for divorce when both partners are in Christ.
All of your questions deal only with the permanence view of marriage. My blog is about the biblical commands against being unequally yoked in marriage. I hope my answers have been helpful. I am always available for further discussion.
Christ’s continued blessings,
Joe
August 15th, 2021 at 12:47 PM
So beautifully stated. Perfect comparison between forgiveness of a murderer and seeing that person go to prison. Consequences. God had me continue to provide some of the helpmeet benefits and kindnesses to my covenant breaker husband— not for his benefit but for me to see and remember that I did not break the covenant. He kept me blameless.
August 15th, 2021 at 2:04 PM
Very Beautiful Donna. Praise be to God.
In Christ,
Joe
November 24th, 2020 at 8:48 PM
I am very curious your thoughts on Malachi 2:16 and if your have touched base on it, please point me to where. Your view points in divorce within the church, the covenant made is quite interesting. Especially for unequally yoked and a believing Christian.
Here’s the verse by the way. “For I hate divorce,” says the Lord , the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong,” says the Lord of hosts. “So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.”
November 25th, 2020 at 11:32 AM
Natalie,
Greatly appreciate your question. This passage provides the single greatest biblical quote for the “no divorce” crowd. It also stands as a beacon signaling Christians to avoid the rocks of divorce that will crush your vessel. Sadly, it does this for those who have not taken the time to think deeply through a detailed study of the entirety of God’s Word on the subjects of separation and divorce. Imagine embarking upon a biblical study of divorce with the phrase “God hates divorce” as the starting point in your mind. The assumptions immediately (but carelessly) drawn sets the presupposition in one’s mind that divorce must be sinful. Most seemingly cannot overcome this false image as they consider God’s Word on the subject.
I have at least two articles that address Malachi 2. The first is Titled: Does God Actually Hate Divorce This first article is entirely my own study on Malachi and I prefer the outcome in it over the second, which is titled: Fallacies Prohibiting Believers from God’s Gracious Provision for a Legal Divorce
Christ’s Continued Blessings,
Joe
June 16th, 2020 at 8:20 PM
You better read your Bibles about the marriage from Genesis to Revelation instead if trusting this rubbish article. Study the Word deeply and find out that the permission for real divorce is only given in the Gospel of Matthew, which is written to Jews, and the exception is “fornication” which means it is in premarital engagement status and not in postmarital “adultery’ when the covenant is until the death of any of the parties.
July 9th, 2020 at 8:05 PM
Itinchev,
Thank you for your response to the article. We completely agree that the Word of God is the source and standard by which we measure the truth. Yours is a marvelous example of the vitriol expressed by those who hold the no divorce ever doctrinal position. It is from your perspective, multiplied by hundreds of thousands of Christians, that Christians who have been through a divorce can expect to be treated like second-class citizens or worse in the church. Including Christians whose unbelieving spouse chose to leave. “ But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.“?
July 28th, 2020 at 11:18 AM
Please learn what is a blood covenant and that it ends ONLY by the physical death of one of the sides – 1 Cor. 7:39, Rom. 7:1- and also the difference between fornication (porneia) and adultery (moikeia) during the time of Jesus. Additionally find out what the Church fathers have taught about the divorce and second marrige until 16th century when the idea of Jesus’s and Paul’s exceptions were firstly promoted by Erasmus of Rotterdam.
July 28th, 2020 at 11:39 AM
Ivaylo,
What you call a “blood covenant” is actually a bilateral covenant between two people (presumably who bleed). God’s covenants are unilateral. You are correct to state that death ends bilateral covenants, but so does covenant breaking. This is such a universal truth taught in God’s Word that it becomes obvious that those who fail to acknowledge it have been so biased by a false doctrine that they cannot properly understand the very phrases they read in Holy Writ. On the one hand you condemn the believer who secures a divorce from a godless spouse as a covenant breaker, but on the other you deny that the godless spouse breaks the covenant. You also defy all logic as you proclaim that a broken covenant is intact still. I understand the difficult position you are in because I pulled out of it myself with great reluctance and significant mental and emotional pain. It is always difficult to pull away from the security of superstitious beliefs held by the majority. It is equally difficult to take the biblically accurate position when it has become unpopular. For reasons too numerous to go into here, the biblical position on divorce and remarriage has almost always been unpopular. R.C. Sproul said that every theologian is probably only correct 80% of the time. I think that is likely pretty accurate, and I fear that for most theologians their unbiblical position on divorce and remarriage falls in the 20% category.
Christ’s continue blessings brother,
Joe
July 30th, 2020 at 7:23 AM
Why didn’t you approve my last reply?
July 30th, 2020 at 10:01 AM
Itinchev,
I never received another reply. The only reply that has not been approved is yours that reads, “Why didn’t you approve my last reply?” If you saved it, then send it again.
Joe
July 28th, 2020 at 9:41 AM
Mr Itinchev, My wife bashed me when I was sleeping. she also stayed out late at night with other men and told me she was “working.” I find it hard to follow people who don’t understand the Bible and want to be “lock-step” in some conservative utopia that allows domestic violence and cheaters. I agree with Joe. I am not going to deal with getting evidence she had sex and I’m NOT going to be a punching bag. She broke the Covenant, I didn’t. .
July 28th, 2020 at 11:22 AM
Duh,
Thank you for your reply. It is not Mr. Itinchev’s position but mine that is the more conservative. It is so difficult to follow God’s command to be yoked only to believers that tens of thousands of God’s chosen people stay in marriages with the godless. The cost of divorcing a godless spouse is insurmountable for too many. Financial, emotional, logistical and loss of status costs are very high. Sadly, perhaps the greatest reason for this tragic state of affairs is the position held by Mr. Itinchev. Calling divorce a sin when it is nowhere mentioned as such in God’s Word justifies spending the entirety of one’s life yoked to a child of Satan. Far from being a sin, divorce is a punishment for the covenant breaker. Divorce is also a gracious avenue for repentance for the elect who find that they are married to a child of Satan. And Mr. Itinchev, it was our Lord Jesus who said they were the children of their father the devil, yet you insist they remain unequally yoked to them because you desire man to serve the institution rather than the institution of marriage serving man. Christian men and women are only served well by the institution of marriage when they are bound to a believing yoke-fellow.
Christ’s continued blessings,
Joe
July 28th, 2020 at 11:24 AM
Please note that divorcing and marrying again are two separate subjects. Anyone can divorce on paper and not live with the partner but the re-marriage is not allowed because it is an adultery (not fornication i.e. the divorcement papers do not destroy the blood covenant until death).
July 28th, 2020 at 11:49 AM
Keep studying God’s Word in prayer that God will reveal the truths within. I must go for now.
July 28th, 2020 at 11:30 AM
Mr. Porter, I have said by no means that the divorce by signing a divorcement document is a sin since it allows physical separation of both sides and may have a disciplinary result. However the marriage covenant is until the death of any of the two sides. So even separated, the sides shoud think of coming back together or stay unmaried (1 Cor. 7:11). That why when the disciples heard the teaching of Jesus exclaimed “…If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.” (Mathew 19:10). All of them were shocked by the words of Jesus.
July 28th, 2020 at 11:44 AM
Simply a weak argument brother. Assuming precisely what motivated the disciples thousands of years later is impossible, but more to the point, Jesus was teaching against the abuse of divorce by the religious leaders who believed that divorce could be had for “any cause”. Read God’s Word in its entirety with an open mind and you would see the error of your thinking. Of course, most cannot do this because their presuppositions are too strong and they interpret the scriptures for them.
Joe
July 28th, 2020 at 11:47 AM
Worse yet dear brother is that your position denies even our Lord’s exception for pornia. Even in cases of adultery you say that the believing spouse cannot remarry. An absurd position. If only I had the time to explain just how absurd it is…
July 28th, 2020 at 12:04 PM
I have studied the subject for years and have read many books and articles so I know what I am talking about. I hope you are ready to stand before God one day and give report why have you encauraged brothers and sisters to live in an adultery union when their old covenant is still in action because none of the sides has died. The only way a functional blood covenent to be canceled is to put one of the sides to death. If you cannot do so, you cannot end the covenent in any other way. Saying that the disciples were all shocked because Jesus took the side of Shammai and not Hillel, is simply wrong, because it would mean that all of them supported the position of Hillel. They didn’t expect the answer of Jesus combined with citing Gensis and explaining that neither side is right because “from the beginning it was not so” and the only reason for a real divorce from the marriage covenent and anuuling it can happen due to fornication and not adultery (and surely not for any other reason like abuse, cheating, etc.). Of course, the divorce on paper can be a good social way to split the innocent side and protect it from the gulity side, but that surely doesn’t cancel the covenant as Jesus described and Paul confirmed. So I am fine with my thinking and I am not planning to change it in any way.
July 31st, 2020 at 1:31 PM
I see. Well, you certainly seem to believe that you have worked this all out. BTW, I found your comment in the spam folder. Just this one. I wondered whether or not God put it there since all your other comments did not go into the spam folder.
If you are in Christ, then even the doctrinal errors you hold have been atoned for by the Lord Jesus Christ. Having said that, it is better for those you teach if you get your doctrinal understanding from the Word of God and not from the “many books and articles” you sight. I too have ready many books and commentaries on the subject of divorce and remarriage, but I did so in order to discover from where the unbiblical popular opinion sprung.
My salvation comes from the atoning sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, and my understanding on divorce and remarriage comes directly from God’s Word, so yes Itinchev, I am prepared to stand before God with my doctrinal understanding on divorce and remarriage. Unless a brother can show me through scripture or eminent reason where I err I can do no other.
Christ’s continued blessings,
Joe
July 28th, 2020 at 11:19 AM
Please learn what is a blood covenant and that it ends ONLY by the physical death of one of the sides – 1 Cor. 7:39, Rom. 7:1- and also the difference between fornication (porneia) and adultery (moikeia) during the time of Jesus. Additionally find out what the Church fathers have taught about the divorce and second marrige until 16th century when the idea of Jesus’s and Paul’s exceptions were firstly promoted by Erasmus of Rotterdam.
October 10th, 2018 at 4:29 AM
cool site. Cheers for posting.
July 4th, 2018 at 6:44 AM
Hi there,
I have read a lot of articles regarding the exception clause allowing a spouse to divorce a partner who perpetually breaks the covenant. But few address the issue of the covenant breaker divorcing their spouse to be with someone else, thus abandoning the marriage.
I was a faithful wife to him, although we had our difficulties. Unfortunately he responded to challenges by drinking heavily and losing interest in church life. I am not saying I was perfect but I loved my husband and was invested in saving our marriage. But when a difficult season came upon us, he started to spend more time in his work community, had an affair with someone from his office. He married her, and she left him after five years. He then had a string of girlfriends, and remarried yet again. I understand that he had no grounds to divorce me, so his remarriage cannot come under the exception clause. But where does that leave me?
Thanks for any insight,
Emmily
July 8th, 2018 at 1:05 PM
Emmily,
I am very saddened for all the pain this has caused you. Nobody is perfect, so you do not need to claim that you have not been perfect. Nevertheless, your husband forfeited the right to be your husband the first time he committed adultery. You should have divorced him, but the fact that he divorced you changed nothing. You are free to marry in the Lord assuming that you are truly born-again. Your husband clearly was not and is not born-again, which meant that he is not a Christian. Well over 90% of people who call themselves Christians are doing nothing more than breaking the third of the Ten Commandments, namely taking the Lord thy God’s name in vain. They vainly call themselves Christians while failing to love and serve Christ and His church. With percentages like this you are likely unsaved yourself, which would mean that you should first seek a genuine relationship with Jesus Christ. But if you are already one of the “majestic ones” who have truly been saved and who have become part of the body of Christ, then you should seek a believing spouse if being single is not your gift. Most churches today are completely worthless.
Begin immediately listening to Martyn Lloyd-Jones sermons at MLJTrust.org. If you have no interest in listening to him, then you are not in Christ.
The Churches’ views on divorce are almost entirely wrong from a biblical standpoint. Read Paul’s letter to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians chapter 7) and then read my two most recent articles on the same biblical passage.
Christ’s continued blessings!
July 9th, 2018 at 3:03 PM
Joe I would caution saying someone must listen to such and such pastor or sermon. The Word of God is the lamp to our feet, a light to our path. Blessings.
July 19th, 2018 at 6:30 PM
Chris Lee,
Although I could not agree more with your statement that God’s word is our source for light and truth, I must acknowledge before you that God’s word has commanded us to go and preach the gospel and the truth. Preaching the word of God is one of the ways that God’s Spirit works in the lives of people. Sadly we have so few good preachers and so many peddlers of the gospel. Perhaps you should sit under the ministry of D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones for a few weeks before you dismiss the value of truly godly preaching.
Christ’s continued blessings!
June 14th, 2018 at 7:31 AM
12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you[b] to peace. 16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
June 14th, 2018 at 12:32 PM
Andrew,
I appreciate your offering this biblical text in response to reading “It is lawful to leave a broken covenant”, yet you have not made a comment. Therefore, I am assuming that you think this text conflicts with something I have said in this article. Please prayerfully read the two newest articles dealing with this very biblical text that you have kindly offered. I will look forward to further correspondence with you.
Christ’s continued blessings.
June 12th, 2014 at 12:31 AM
We must follow the Lord as His Holy Spirit guides us through our lives. Anyone considering divorce when unequally yoked must seek God’s will for them, but I think that scripture calls us out of such marriages and most of the church over the centuries has had a different view. This is why it is so important to petition the Lord and follow His lead. People will judge and make such divorces costly, but we must follow the Lord and His word. We serve the Lord and cannot be men pleasers. Be sure to read the other articles on my blog to get as informed as possible. Many more articles are coming soon. Christ’s continued blessings. Joe
April 28th, 2014 at 8:28 PM
Paul told the Corinthians that unequally yoked relationships have no commonality, harmony, fellowship and agreement. So it is even worse than very difficult for all involved. We learn to cope, but we could never hope to flourish and grow very well in such awful relationships. Thanks for your comment!
April 28th, 2014 at 3:20 PM
I really like what you said here and I agree with it. I have experience in being the child of unequally yoked parents. It is very difficult.
March 19th, 2022 at 10:31 AM
Could you expound on what constitutes breaking the covenant (besides adultery)? Does withholding affection (any form) for 10 years break it? Does harsh words and tones? Does unwillingness to attend church and sulking and difficulty if i go count? And how should it be phrased to that person as to why divorce is necessary? I divorced him once for similar reasons, then remarried to be biblical – he agreed to change etc and was ok for a couple years but without threat of divorce reverted back. I do not wish to do that again. We get along as roommates but the marriage ended years ago – i think he is good with this tho. But I am not…
March 20th, 2022 at 1:40 AM
Paula,
Yours is a broader question than can be answered without more discussion. I will send this reply to your email as well and would appreciate having a discussion so that I can help you understand your specific case. Biblically speaking, I do not find the idea that adultery is the only grounds for divorce. So what does constitute biblical grounds? As the spirit is greater than the body, so also spiritual adultery is a greater sin than physical adultery. Thus if one spouse is born-again and the other is not, then divorce is very likely necessary. The problem for many is that they cannot discern between true saints and false confessors. Scripture clearly delineates the difference. “You shall know them by their fruits” Jesus taught. Marriage is compared to Christ Jesus and His Church. Neither Christ nor the saints commit treachery against one another. The saints continue in sin until they sleep in this world and wake in heaven, but they cannot commit treachery against the Lord Jesus. They will persevere and be preserved for the day of the Lord.
In a marriage, when one spouse commits treachery against the other, they have broken the marriage covenant and the innocent spouse is free to separate and divorce their treacherous partner. Treachery can take many forms, but the failures to “love and cherish” and/or to “forsake all others” certainly qualify. This unwillingness or inability to keep these marital promises will nearly always come from a godless heart–thus an unequally yoked marriage exists.
Paula, thank you for taking the time to write. I look forward to having the opportunity to speak one on one to help you further.
Christ’s Continued Blessings,
Joe