How the body of Christ Misunderstood God’s Teaching on Divorce

The church traditionally holds a prohibitive position on marital divorce for those in the body of Christ who find themselves bound in marriage to an unbeliever.  We think that position to be antithetical to the instructions given in God’s word, and we understand that the burden of proof falls upon the outlier and not upon the larger body of believers.  In order to overturn the majority view, the evidence must be found in the pages of Scripture.  So then, if the church has traditionally and continually taken the opposite view of the one found in Scripture, then the reasons for the majority of Christians missing the mark should be retraceable.

Here is a list of those very reasons that have biased the body of Christ away from God’s heart, as revealed in Scripture, on the subject of marital divorce for believers bound together with unbelievers:

1. The church has consistently failed at being in the world but not of the world. It rarely fulfills God’s desire for believers to separate themselves from unbelievers.  Those such as the Puritans who were more faithful at separating themselves from the world were closer to our view of divorce for the unequally yoked.  John Milton (The Doctrine & Discipline of Divorce) being a prime example.  Note: Being separate as commanded in Scripture must not be confused with separatism.
2. The church focused in at least two wrong directions. First, it focused on marriage without regard to the greater doctrine of separation from the world.  Second, when unequally yoked marriages began to fail the church focused on medicating the symptoms (Adultery, desertion, and physical abuse, deception, corruption, etc.) rather than upon curing the diseased condition (unequally yoked marriage).
3. Family is near the top of any list of idols, and many Christians worship at the family alter; prioritizing/worshipping family above or alongside God.  When family becomes an idol, then marital divorce damages the image of one’s idol and comes into conflict with God’s commands against being bound together with unbelievers.  Justifying a stricter prohibition on divorce solved the conflict.
4. In a departure from biblical truth and logical reasoning, churchman transubstantiated divorce from that of a safeguard or protection to an immoral, almost unforgivable sin. If divorce was, in and of itself a sin, then Ezra would not have entered into a covenant with God to oversee the divorces of over a hundred unequally yoked marriages, and God would not have divorced Israel and Judah. Both marriage and the dissolution of same are amoral actions. Transforming marital divorce into a sin is equivalent to calling marriage a virtue. But getting into an unequally yoked marriage, a homosexual marriage, a polygamous marriage or an open marriage are abominations in God’s word. Marriage to a “suitable” (Gen. 2:20) partner and a divorce from an unsuitable partner (1 Corinthians 7:12-16 and 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1) are virtues.
5. The church was complicit with, if not behind, the shotgun wedding concept even when one of the fornicators was a believer and the other was not. The desire to force men to atone for their fornication supplanted God’s command against unequally yoked marriages. Two wrongs do not make a right. Forcing a scoundrel to get married does not inhibit his/her evil desires and actions; it does however avail him/her a ready victim upon whom they can inflict further wickedness.
6. The church built a man-made divorce doctrine upon a few passages of scripture, often out of context, to the exclusion of much greater passages and related doctrines.
7. The church failed to make a distinction for divorce between those who are equally yoked and those who are unequally yoked (see article on a comparison to killing).
8. Most of the church failed to understand the actual condition of those unequally yoked, so they shamed them for their sin deeming them deserving of the life-long “consequences” (unequally yoked marriage). Consequences that were actually forbidden by God but wrongfully insisted upon by churchmen.
9. Fairness or the pettiness of man: “The rest of us don’t get a do-over, so neither should you”.
10. Churchmen have fallen into group think and have come under the pressure of each generations’ thinking the same way.

All of the causes listed above have been explained in detail previously in blog articles except for the second cause, which is why it will be the focus of this article.

You will recall, the second reason why the church missed the mark on divorce for the unequally yoked believer is that the church focused in at least two wrong directions:

First, the church balkanized marriage from the greater doctrine of separation from the world.

Second, the church focused upon medicating the symptoms that inevitably arise in unequally yoked marriages rather than upon diagnosing and curing the disease of the divinely forbidden, unequally yoked marriage.

Before we get to these two points let us examine a brief parenthetical on the doctrine of separation.  Separation is among the most ubiquitous doctrines in God’s word.  We believe it to be the very first command found in Scripture.  Genesis 1:4 says, “God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.”  Of course, this is an implicit command, but we see it as a command nonetheless.  Could it be said that darkness represented bad or evil at the moment God separated light from darkness?  We argue yes, for the following reasons: First, the Apostle John opens his first epistle saying, “This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5).  God cannot sin for He is Holy, Holy, Holy, and in Him there is no darkness at all.  We surmise that God is communicating to us, at the opening of His revelation of Himself, that darkness represents that which is opposed to God who is Light.  And God separates the light from the darkness.  In every facet of life we should spend our lifetimes doing the same thing.  Darkness is not of God.

Second, Genesis 1:2 says, “The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.”  One commentator understands this dark, formless void to be chaos before the Spirit of God begins to bring order and light.  Only after God created light did He begin to call His creation good.  We can safely assume that our creator God wanted us to know He would never have left our world in darkness, formlessness and emptiness.  He was only getting started in His creative work.  Separating light from darkness was His first step in creating that which was good.  Speaking the created order into existence was not declared good until God, who Himself is Light, created light for his creation as well.  Thus darkness was intended to represent what man would soon learn to recognize as evil.  Finally, all of Scripture depicts darkness as the evil domain of Satan and fallen humanity.  There is no reason to understand darkness in Genesis 1:2-4 as anything other than that same wickedness and evil.  Also, man did not exist while chaos was upon the face of the earth, so no confusion as to where darkness originated was necessary.  Remember, God was aware of the darkness of evil prior to His creation because Satan had already fallen from grace.  Also, God wanted Adam and Eve to be free of the knowledge of good and evil, which is why He forbid the fruit from the tree at the center of the garden.  Obviously, God had knowledge of darkness and evil, and darkness was portrayed in these opening words of Scripture as the opposite of God’s Light.

In addition to separation being the first command in God’s word, that which Paul refers to as the “deeds of darkness” (Ephesians 5:11), are literally the closing words of the Scriptures, followed by nothing but a short epilogue, closing out Revelation, consisting of verses 16-21.  Revelation 22 verse 14, “Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city.”  Verse 15 (Note: The final verse of Scripture before a six verse epilogue), “Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying.”  Except for a brief epilogue, the deeds of darkness are literally the last words in the Scriptures and it is clearly stated that those who practice such will not gain access to the tree of life and will be left outside the gates of Heaven…those practicing lawlessness in the dark will be separated from the light (God).

How important must separation be if the Scriptures open and close with this all important doctrine?  Not only is God Light, but Jesus is also referred to as Light in John 3:19-21 where Jesus says, “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.  For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.  But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”  Darkness is clearly alluded to by the Lord as the absence of Light, “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.”  Nevertheless, clearly the doctrine of separation is what our Lord is talking about.  We are separated from one another when some turn to the Light while others turn to darkness.  We are separated from God when we turn toward evil deeds of darkness and away from the Light.

Finally, in Matthew 10:34 Jesus says, “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.”  There simply is not sufficient time to cover the biblical doctrine of separation thoroughly, but Christ’s sword separates the righteous from the wicked.  It was the reason for which Jesus was born, lived a perfect life, died a penal, propitiatory, atoning sacrificial death on the cross, arose from the dead, appeared over a 40 day period of time before hundreds of witnesses and ascended into a cloud to the right hand of the Father.  He came to justify those whom the Father gave Him.  In their justification Jesus separated the children of Light away from the children of this dark world.  The Scriptures are replete with passages that instruct us to do the same.  To separate ourselves from this evil world and from the corrupting influence of “bad company”.  “Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness” (2 Corinthians 6:14)?  Paul’s is a rhetorical question and the answer is a resounding “None”, there is NO fellowship between darkness and light…these are and must forever be separate from one another.

FIRST, MARRIAGE BALKANIZED FROM DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION

The biblical doctrine of separation is foundational in order to get Christian marriage right.  Marriage and subsequently divorce have traditionally been balkanized from the biblically ubiquitous doctrine on separation from the world, which has led to a high percentage of Christians binding themselves in marriage to unbelievers.  This balkanization has especially lead to an extra-biblical prohibitive doctrine on divorce for those who have entered into unequally yoked marriages.

We think an additional factor complicates the current situation as well.  The church has not always been in alignment with the Scriptures throughout the centuries as to what actually constitutes a marriage or put another way, who exactly is married and who is not.  Consider that today it has almost become an antiquarian idea for a young couple to get married without first having slept together in the marriage bed for months or even years.  Too many churchmen are looking the other way as they call these couples neither married nor fornicators.  On the other hand, young couples whom embrace traditional values could meet, fall in love and marry all within the span of a month until one of them decides they made a big mistake.  They could separate from their new spouse and get a divorce, and the church would mark them as a divorced person for the rest of their life.  So then, the cohabitating couples can live together for several years all the while engaging in sexual relations and perhaps even having children together, but when their relationship falls apart and they separate the church fails to treat them as divorced even though God and the state do not fail to do so.

So we must ask ourselves, are people married because their parents arranged a marriage against their wishes, because they simply claim to be married, because they have a marriage license, because they had a church ceremony, because they have voluntary sexual relations, because they live together regularly having sexual relations, because they have entered into a covenant, or because God has joined them as husband and wife? Do we care to ask: When does God view them as a married couple?

To understand marriage apart from God’s doctrine of separation from the world is very much like trying to understand marriage apart from the biblical doctrine on homosexuality. Today homosexuals claim to be married, they can get a marriage license in all 50 states, they can have “church” ceremonies, they can live together, they can make a covenant with one another, but God certainly does not join them in marriage for He says “to the wicked”, “What right have you…to take My covenant in your mouth” (Psalm 50:16)?  So if God prohibits both homosexual marriages (implicitly) and unequally yoked marriages (explicitly), and He most certainly does, then why does the church acknowledge one as a legitimate marriage and not the other?

Certainly if a person in a homosexual marriage wanted to repent of their homosexual behavior the church would be quick to celebrate their legal divorce, and that repentant soul would not be marked with a “D” for divorce. They would rather be lauded as a prodigal child returning to submissive obedience.  But if an unequally yoked believer wanted to repent of their godless marriage they are forbidden to do so by the church and can expect no support whatsoever before, during or after they choose to obey God who clearly commanded, “Do not be bound together with unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 6:14).  And this even after the biblical example of Ezra and Nehemiah’s last chapters depicting over a hundred examples of divorces for the unequally yoked.

From the perspective of God’s Word, if two males are not “suitable” or do not “correspond to” [Genesis 2:20] one another for the purposes of marriage, then neither does a saint and a reprobate “correspond to” one another.  In fact, their ability to “correspond to” one another or be “suitable” partners for one another is less than that of the two unrepentant, unbelieving males.  Nevertheless, neither pairing can expect God’s blessing upon a marriage union; neither pairing has a right to take God’s covenant in their mouth.  Therefore both pairings must not fear a divine prohibition or hindrance when they later repent by divorcing their unsuitable partners.

So then, the doctrine of marriage must cease being balkanized from the greater doctrine of separation.  Christian marriages must be as scripture insists: “Only in the Lord”.  Being in an unequally yoked marriage is prohibited to all of God’s children both in the Old and New Testaments.

SECONDLY, TREATING SYMPTOMS SUPPLANTED CURING THE CONDITION

Now we should like to consider how the church set out to treat the symptoms that inevitably arise in unequally yoked marriages rather than upon the condition of a believer who is bound together with an unbeliever in marriage.

Consider the analogy of a sick person seeking a physician’s care. When a person seeks medical attention the physician immediately begins probing the patient for the symptoms that have caused them to seek medical attention.  The reason all prudent physicians collect symptoms is that they want to properly diagnose the actual condition of the patient.  Imprudent physicians, on the other hand, treat the symptoms one by one in order to make the patient feel more comfortable in their poor condition, which often leads to a declining condition and ultimately a fatal condition.

The prudent physician, on the other hand, seeks to accurately diagnose the condition as early as possible in an attempt to separate the patient from their diseased and declining condition. Once an accurate diagnosis is determined the physician can work to replace the patient’s diseased condition with a healthy condition.  Miraculously, after a successful diagnosis and subsequent cure, the symptoms disappear on their own as the diseased condition generating them no longer exists.

The doctrine of divorce for the unequally yoked believer becomes plain when these logical concepts are applied. Has the church traditionally acted like the prudent physician or the imprudent physician?  Clearly the church has acted imprudently in treating the symptoms one by one as they arise in these marriages while forbidding a removal of the diseased and declining condition in which the regenerate marriage partner finds himself/herself.  The regenerate partner, being bound together with an unbeliever, is in a diseased and declining condition.  The church should have diagnosed this condition and prescribed a complete separation from the unbelieving spouse as was done in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah.  This restorative action would remove the believing spouse from their diseased and declining condition and restore to them a healthy condition.  The symptoms of adultery, abandonment, physical abuse, lying, cheating, corrupting, slandering, impairing spiritual growth and so many more would miraculously disappear as the diseased and declining condition of being unequally yoked has been dealt with once and for all.

To be clear, how exactly has the church focused upon the symptoms at the expense of the unequally yoked believer whose condition is diseased and declining? To begin with the church has tried to determine which, if any, of the symptoms rise to the level of making an allowance for divorce.  In their desire to be consistent most churchmen historically have decided that no allowance for divorce is biblical; as stated earlier they balkanized the doctrine of separation from the doctrine of marriage in order to draw this conclusion.  Secondly, the church has engaged extensively in counseling unequally yoked couples and trying to get them to “get along” better.  This has so horribly missed the mark, and it should have been obvious to all who read the scriptures that such a path could never work.

Paul told the Corinthians as much when he wrote the following:

2 Corinthians 6:14-16, “Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial (Satan), or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?  Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols?”

The church has been trying to reconcile couples who God says have no chance at partnership, fellowship, harmony, commonality, and agreement. Not to mention that God has forbidden believers to enter into these marriages, “Do not be bound together with unbelievers.”  And anecdotes of keeping these marriages peacefully together do not pass the muster as it cannot be shown how much more sanctified the believer would have been had they never married or quickly divorced the unbelieving spouse and gotten remarried to a fellow believer as scripture prescribes.  Or neither spouse is actually a believer, but one is very religious and people think they are witnessing an unequally yoked marriage where the two spouses get along wonderfully.  But that is simply because neither are in Christ, so they are equally yoked and not a house divided after all.

As it currently stands, the church has effectively deemed as outcasts all of its unequally yoked members who have gone through a marital divorce when what it should have been doing was assisting these believers in eradicating the wicked condition of being unequally yoked. They failed to mark as wicked the condition of being unequally yoked, and they succeeded at demonizing brothers and sisters who have not only been cleansed by the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, but who have also taken the difficult step of repenting of their unequally yoked marriage.  Calling this the “easy way out of a difficult marriage” misses the mark completely.  Separation from ones spouse whom they have loved is traumatic.  The pain can last for years.  Had the church focused upon the condition of being bound together with unbelievers rather than focusing upon the symptoms of these marriages it would have far more effectively prevented a significant percentage of these marriages from taking place at all.  Had the church effectively shamed the practice of marrying outside the kingdom of God rather than celebrating such marriages after the stubborn members of the church entered into them, the unequally yoked pandemic within the body of Christ would have never taken place.  The church would have been so much the better for having followed God’s path, and untold numbers of God’s children could have avoided entire lifetimes of the evil influence of godless spouses.

The church is finding out how this biblical approach would have worked as it applies it to the homosexual marriage issue. When a church follows God’s precepts, whole families will leave the church in order to support their homosexual family member.  While these families think they are demonstrating love for a family member bent on sin they merely succeed at cementing their loved one into their reprobate condition.  In so doing, these family members should feel the pain of separation from the body of Christ.  They should sense a tug toward the world and away from God for choosing an unrepentant family member over obedience to the Word of God and fellowship with the family of God.  Jesus said he came not to bring peace but a sword that would divide families.  Why?  Because some would prove to be children of God while others would remain children of Satan.  This inevitably drives a wedge between even the closest of family members.  Every regenerate soul has felt the rejection of this separation.  Every regenerate soul has felt the familial attachment die with unrepentant family members.

The church can still get this right. The church must get this right.  God says, “Do not be bound together with unbelievers.”  Love them, share the gospel with them, but do not be bound together with unbelievers.