Divorcement for Kingdom’s Sake

     We are now inundated with a myriad of false doctrines pertaining to divorcement. Many have been carried away with the mental divorcement mentality; thus, allowing them to condone and fellowship post divorcement putting away. For forty years, I have been stressing relative to divorcement precisely what I am convinced Jesus meant to be accented: The act of putting away must be correct or all subsequent action is sin and the only cause for acceptable divorcement is fornication, the fornication of the guilty mate (Matt. 5: 32, etc.). Many seem to not understand this basic and precluding truth. "The issue is marriage to another, not divorcement," we hear. The issue is two people maintaining the vows that they have exchanged one to another in the presence of God, a marriage for life, fornication being the only possible reason for the undoing of the bond (Mal. 2: 14, Matt. 19: 4-12). If more brethren had been placing the stress where Jesus placed it, they would not have had opportunity to manufacture all the aberrant theories about mental divorcement, etc. Again, if the divorce is not the result of fornication, the innocent putting away the fornicating mate, then all else is wrong, regardless of the passing of time, the number of subsequent marriages, children born into these relationships, etc. (Rom. 7: 3f., I Cor. 7: 2f.)!

     One matter that we are hearing more of today is the so called, "Divorcement for the Kingdom of heaven’s sake." Since I cannot read this expression in the scriptures, I must be told what it means. One preacher who has promoted this teaching more than any of whom I am aware and exerts tremendous influence, especially on young preachers teaches:

     To quote this teaching more fully:

     One might say, "Brother Martin, they present scripture to support their position!" It is important that we point out that the proponents of "divorce for the Kingdom’s sake" typically start with an illustration, mix it with other cases that are of a different sort, and then draw a conclusion, a conclusion that they apply to both sets of examples. I say this because in their general application, they are referring to marriages having a bond or marriages that God has joined. In their first case ("a." in the above), it is a marriage to which the couple has no right at all and it is fornication. Hence, any "divorce" in the first case would simply and only be civil compliance, since there was never a marriage bond (see addendum 1).

     Let us look at this scripture we are being told teaches divorce for the sake of the Kingdom. First, consider Jesus’ teaching in Luke 14: 26:

     Jesus is teaching that his followers must love him more than all others. To use this verse to teach divorce for a cause other than fornication is to make one verse contradict another (Matt. 19: 4f.). Marriage (scriptural marriage) is for life. Death ends the bond and fornication provides the innocent mate with the option of terminating it, other than this, there is no cause.

     Mike Willis lists a number of reasons for divorcement. One may divorce a mate if that mate runs up bills, is abusive to the children, or for one’s emotional health (Ibid.). Mike even includes divorcement due to developed hostility between the couple. All of this Mike calls, "Divorcement for the sake of the Kingdom" and insists that Luke 14: 26 is teaching such. Consider Luke 18: 29, another proof verse for divorcement for the sake of the Kingdom:

     Jesus’ statement is in answer to Peter’s question pertaining to the apostles leaving all to preach and be with Jesus (vs. 28-30). To imagine that Jesus is teaching divorce for reasons other than what he has expressly taught is utter and irresponsible use of the scriptures. Jesus does not even have in mind marital difficulties such as a mate incurring bills, children abuse, or one’s emotional health. The context is not marital hostilities.

     I have done my share of working with people with marital difficulties. I have seen all the problems that are being listed as reasons for divorce. However, I cannot inform the people in these marriages that they have the option of divorce when they do not. What has happened is a preacher who believes in "divorce for the sake of the Kingdom" offers divorce as an option, I know of some who even demanded it, knowing that such would not allow marriage to another because there has been no fornication. However, after a while, the "wrong mate" marries another and then these men say to the mate they view as the "right mate," "Now you can divorce for fornication and be able to marry another." (See addendum 2.)

     Jesus taught only one reason for divorcement for an apparent reason: To preclude all the chaos that has now been introduced by those not content with Jesus’ teaching. Jesus’ reason plus….do not equal one reason, regardless of how "fair" these other reasons may sound. I certainly believe in putting Jesus first over all, including a mate (Luke 14: 26, 18: 29). However, I do not believe such entails divorcement and the rejection of the marriage duties that we have accepted when we engage in the marriage vows (I Cor. 7: 2f.). These men thus teaching have not only created basic and initial error, but they have also helped to open the door for all the current flood of false teaching on divorce and marriage to another. (Addendum 3.)