Here are some points that
I feel are appropriate
to individuals and couples seeking biblical knowledge and freedom in these
times.
Remembering that in the scripture, we are told that the
perfect law brings freedom. If you have
exhausted every avenue in trying to resolve issues in your marriage and still
there is no freedom, it may be a good idea to re-examine what Jesus teaches us in the New Testament.
God gave Moses commandments. He expounded on the
commandments to bring us the rest of the law, which is laid out in Leviticus.
God considered adultery a serious problem, so it was given
to Moses as a commandment and etched into stone that “you shall not commit
adultery”.
The commandment “you shall not murder” is fairly obviously
defined in itself, but one cannot simply say that the abortion of a foetus is
murder, because
Genesis 9:6 says, "Whoever sheds
man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made
man."
Leviticus 24:17 says
'If a man takes the life of any human being, he shall surely be put to death.
'If a man takes the life of any human being, he shall surely be put to death.
The core issue is taking a
life of flesh and blood. Abortion tends to be more to do with preventing a life
more than taking a life.
Adultery originates from the Hebrew word that the Israelites
understood implicitly in those times. If we look at the Hebrew translation, the
word adultery originated from the word “naaph” meaning whoredom or licentiousness.
That to me seems to point out the wrong in promiscuous behavior rather than
having a love affair with just one man outside of your marriage partner.
That would make prostitution a form of licentiousness. Today, the meaning has been lost in translation and we have become preoccupied by the issue of marital unfaithfulness, rather than licentiousness
The problem with the law is that adultery is only clearly defined in the New testament when Jesus gives interpretation to how adultery is applicable. Our understanding is made clearer by Jesus' teaching:
Matthew 5:32 NIV
Anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality,
makes her a victim of adultery. Anyone who marries a divorced woman commits
adultery.
(She is made a victim of adultery because the divorce
certificate is created by the marriage break-up)
A husband concerned for the future well being of his soon to be ex-wife,
may possibly decide to just separate from her rather than divorce her. That
would allow his wife to enter another relationship or be re-marryable.
The danger to men is in marrying a woman who is divorced. A
man would be better off marrying a woman who has separated from her husband, but better off not marrying her if she was divorced from him. If you
care about your soon to be ex-wife’s future happiness it may be best to simply separate
from her with a settlement and not issue a legal divorce with ensuing divorce
certificate.
The New Living Translation says “and
I tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery--unless his wife has been unfaithful." ...
Again, referring to the Hebrew commandment, the problem of
adultery is licentiousness, not unfaithfulness. Other translations state that
the problem is lewdness, unchaste or fornication of the wife. Unfaithfulness is not the central problem. Promiscuity
is more the core issue.
God’s Word translation has an interesting slant:
But I can guarantee that
any man who divorces his wife for any reason other than unfaithfulness makes
her look as though she has committed adultery. Whoever marries a woman divorced
in this way makes himself look as though he has committed adultery.
Matthew 19:9 NIV
I tell you that anyone who
divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman
commits adultery."
Here the emphasis points out that the problem is anything
other than sexual immorality.
The New Living Translation backs this up:
And I tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery--unless his wife has been unfaithful."
This appears to qualify the
unfaithfulness as being acceptable, the immorality a problem. Again, I would
say that if there were unfaithfulness by consent of the husband or non-consent
of the husband that is considered to be acceptable. It is when the wife becomes
immoral, licentious or promiscuous in her unfaithfulness that is the problem. For that reason, I would say that the issue has been confused in Matthew 19:9 rather than clarified.
Neither Mark nor John’s
gospel offer much expansion on our knowledge and I would say that once you have
studied these yourself, you will agree that Matthew’s gospel is where the true
defining explanations of adultery come from.
To put those findings into
layman’s terms, the following points on adultery ought to be made:
If your wife cheats on you
behind your back that is not sufficient grounds for divorcing her. You must be
able to prove that she was promiscuous or licentious in her cheating, then that
is what would be the true grounds for divorce.
Nothing is said in the
gospels or epistles about the man’s unfaithfulness in marriage. Perhaps God
felt that wives were more likely to be unfaithful to their husbands than the
other way around. Perhaps God thought that man would find it more difficult to
be promiscuous in a marriage than women. Who knows.
Divorces are issued daily by legal professionals around the world on behalf of men whose wives have cheated on them and so have been unfaithful with their husbands in loving one other man outside their marriage.
That legal stance is unrealistic and contrary to biblical teaching.
If a women must find another man outside her marriage, it could be because her husband won’t or is unable to perform his marital obligations to his wife, not that she has a desire to be promiscuous. ... And I tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else
commits adultery--unless his wife has been unfaithful." ...
commits adultery--unless his wife has been unfaithful." ...
What happens if a man
decides to remain celibate on account of righteousness? Could he claim a God-given right to be served
by married women in a congregation? Possibly, because the commandment is
against re-marriage of divorcees and the promiscuous inclination of wives and
does not deal directly with a man’s needs. If many wives serve one man, then
none of the wives are being promiscuous and the man is not committing adultery
because he has no intention of marrying any of those women. In effect he is in
a polygamous relationship with married women who don't plan to divorce their husbands. No adultery
is possible in that situation and he can still maintain his celibacy.