This was yet another book required for a counselling course I'm about to take (early April). But that doesn't mean I wasn't looking forward to reading it. I've long had a pretty good feel for what I agree with and what I can agree to disagree with, but this book sharpened both of those categories for me.
This is one of those multiple viewpoint books. In this case, four views are shared - each authored by a different gent. Each has a chance to respond to the other, also. The four views, in this case, were:
1. No divorce, no remarriage
2. Divorce in cases of adultery, no remarriage
3. Divorce and remarriage in cases of adultery or desertion.
4. Divorce and remarriage for a variety of reasons.
I don't want to get into the particulars of each view, but rather just to make some observations in general. If anyone has a specific question about the book (or the issues in general), post a comment and I'll try to address it.
Sadly, one of the things that most stands out for me was the less-than-loving tone of Dr. Thomas Edgar (from Capital Bible Seminary, where I studied for a few years before transferring). I don't remember having a class with him, but I did talk to him on occasion and always found him to be kind and pleasant. His tone in this book is not. He is aggressive and not nearly as gracious as the other three authors.
The other three authors show great grace in their presentations and were well worth reading. Edgar's presentation, incidentally, is really more of a refutation of other views than a positive presentation of his own - another odd point. The final author of the book (Larry Richards), for all his grace and kindness, really ends up saying "divorce and remarriage is always sin, but we should just recognize that God forgives and move on" - not a particularly Biblical (or helpful) construction. The first two authors present the "no divorce, no remarriage" and the "divorce for adultery, no remarriage" views and are - as you can imagine - very close to the same basic presentation. Both interact well with all of the various Bible passages, both OT and NT. They are, frankly, much more thorough in their research than either of the other authors (who mainly focus on NT texts only).
In the final analysis, it seems that one's fundamental view of marriage - what it is and what it isn't - is really the deciding factor for most questions concerning divorce and remarriage. Do you believe that marriage is fundamentally an indissoluble institution, or not? That question alone makes most of the difference.
This is a good read, whether you're convinced of a particular position or not. It's always useful to read the opposing views of others, especially when they are crafted with grace. Even Dr. Edgar's chapter, though not as kind as the others, is by no means a mere rant.
Hatushili
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Book Review: Divorce and Remarriage
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I find this to be one of those topics that I can’t quite figure out. Personally, I know where I stand and what I believe the Bible says about divorce and remarriage. I hold marriage as a vow before God, a life long commitment that absolutely should not be broken. Remarriage, however, is one of the areas where my emotions often conflict with my head. I’m very close with a handful of divorced individuals (one in particular) who I can’t help but want to see remarried and provided for. But then again the Bible says that one should not jump in and out of marriages. Your thoughts…
I can (and do) respect those that believe remarriage is perfectly acceptable in the case of marital unfaithfulness or abandonment (unsaved spouse forced an unwanted divorce). This is not where I stand personally, but I can certainly respect those the interpret Scripture this way.
On the other hand, though, when many folk make their case for remarriage it is predicated upon a belief that a) remarriage is the only way for a person to be truly happy again, and b) personal happiness is an/the ultimate goal in life. Obviously I don't think either proposition is true.
Here's another catching point - while I don't believe that remarrying constitutes perpetual adultery (as some do), neither do I accept the "I'll just do what I want and God will forgive me" attitude...
Ultimately - within the latitude of acceptable Biblical hermeneutics - this becomes an issue of motive and heart, and therefore a very hard one to pontificate about in the abstract.
Perhaps if you've got a specific case in your head, you and I could talk about it privately...
Hatushili
It would seem to me that the driving force for singles to remarry is the desire to love and to be loved. Wasn't this part of the reason that God created Eve? God walked and talked with Adam. If that type of relationship did not fulfill Adam's needs then how can a divorced person be fulfilled in their desire to love and be loved?
Dennis said: ...the driving force for singles to remarry is the desire to love and to be loved.
I agree with you, in most cases. There are always other reasons a person would seek remarriage that are somewhat less noble than what you've suggested... but as a rule, I think you're right.
There's no short and easy way to address your question. I would start with the blessing of singleness - Paul, for example, talks often about the opportunities that singles have over and above those of us that are married (and especially those that have small children). We could also look to Heaven, where there's no marriage but yet complete fulfillment of love. Of course this life is a long way from Heaven, but perhaps there's a principle there that can help us.
Really, though, what I think your question hits on is the pathetic shallowness of most our attempts at Christian "community". As I've often posted about here, we generally do a very poor job of creating this kind of community that the NT would have us. We settle for "fast food" community when we could (and should) be feasting on "homemade goodness" community.
I'm convinced that if Christians lived in community like (for example) the Thessalonians, those who've suffered the hurt of divorce would find it much easier to "be fulfilled in their desire to love and be loved" (to quote your question).
I realize that doesn't really answer your question, but it's where I think a search for an answer should begin.
What do the rest of you think?
Hatushili
this is an issue that is very near to my heart. i believe john macarthur has done a thorough study on this specific issue. i have spent much time in prayer over this topic and believe that the holy spirit has given me a clear understanding. i do not believe that a divorced person is not allowed by GOD to remarry. i am no theologian, but i am a strong believer dependent on the leading of the holy spirit.
re: Ina - McArthur and lots of others are in what's been called the "standard Protestant view" in the book I reviewed. The majority of evangelical pastors and leaders seem to hold this view, namely, that a person who divorced because their spouse was unfaithful or a person who was "abandoned" (per 1 Cor 7) by a spouse is permitted by God to remarry.
While I'm not personally persuaded that this is the case, I can certainly respect this position. Many great men and women of God have come to this conclusion, and if you're one of them I respect your view.
My point in the comments above was mostly to say that if we as Christians had the kind of community experience that God wants for us in the life of the church, I don't think the issue of desiring to love and be loved would be as glaring in the lives of singles (whether widows, divorced or otherwise).
One of the ironic things about this book was that the "standard Protestant view" guy was the most intolerant and mean-spirited! Funny, you usually expect the "no remarriage" people to be the less generous. Hopefully Christians today have come to a point that we can agree to disagree within the bounds of normal ways of interpreting the Scriptures.
Hatushili
Just a quick question: if remarriage after divorce constitutes adultery but not perpetual adultery, at what point do you see the relationship evolving from adultery to marriage (or some other classification of relationship)?
re: haggis breath - For me personally, I would say that God constitutes such a marriage as valid and legal in His sight once it is consummated. I do think that initial act would constitute adultery, but to believe in perpetual adultery would require me to say that the right thing for such a couple to do would be to divorce ... but wait, I can't say that, since to divorce would be to sin. So in the midst of this catch-22, I'm forced to make educated guesses.
My educated guess is that the initial consummation of such a remarriage constitutes an act of adultery.
That's all I've got. The tough thing about divorce and remarriage is that Scripture is patently clear about only some of the details.
One particular unclear detail: if there are legitimate grounds for divorce (the so-called "exception clause"), does that automatically admit legitimate grounds for remarriage?
There are others. For that reason and since this issue has such an enormous effect on people's lives, I'm holding what I hold somewhat more loosely than I hold teachings with little unclarity.
Does that make any sense?
Hatushili
hatushili,
How does the consummation make the remarriage valid and legal in God's sight while simultaneously constituting adultery?
Regarding the idea of a divorce being the end of the remarriage, if, in fact, God viewed the new relationship as adultery while still viewing the divorced member of the new union (the remarriage) as married to another (from whom he's divorced), would ending the remarriage relationship by divorce be the same as ending a marriage where neither party was divorced before-hand? (Huh?)
Also, if we take "adultery" in the remarriage to be the same as other "adultery", how would the situation be different if I divorced Mrs. Haggis to marry Miss Scone or just made Miss Scone my mistress without divorcing Mrs. H? Wouldn't God still view my marriage to Mrs. Haggis as valid and her as my wife whichever route I took? If so, shouldn't Miss Scone (or,aka Mrs. Haggis II) be sent packing with a view toward reconciling with Mrs. Haggis, if possible, or else following Matt.19:12 and remaining unmarried so as not to violate the teaching regarding remarriage?
Anyway, straighten me out where need be.
There's no straightening out need doing. You're touching on some of the (many) complications in dealing with divorce and remarriage. I won't pretend to be able to resolve the tensions you've addressed.
Obviously, the right aswer is that no one ever is divorced. My take on all the various positions re:divorce is that everyone thinks God's perfect plan is for lifelong marriage to one's original spouse. That's what I'm shooting for in my own life and the lives of those I counsel.
But the issue is too complicated to make easy platitudes about. How are we to understand the "exception clause" if not as really an exception? I'm not terribly convinced of the "bethrothal" view, nor the "incestuous" view... Then one has to wonder why God didn't make this issue more clear. It is, after all, one of the most central and emotional issues in society.
I just don't know all (or even most) of the answers.
When I come to these, I tend to hold my best informed belief loosely while allowing others to hold theirs. That's where I'm at right now.
Hatushili
Post a Comment