Which divorce does God hate?

I have read Brian Kenyon's good article entitled “Which Divorce Does God Hate?”[i]   It refers to the following passage in Malachi:  Malachi 2:16, “For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away [divorce-gw]: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.”

This passage on God's attitude towards divorce is abused by various opinions and “law makers.”[ii]  The passage says that God hates “putting away.”   But it also tells us what kind of "putting away" (divorce) the prophet is speaking about.

WHAT KIND OF DIVORCE DOES GOD HATE?

Obviously, He would not consider simply a divorce action itself a hateful act since He (1) allows it under Moses in Deuteronomy 24:1-3 and again with Jesus in Matthew 19:9. (2) God Himself divorced Israel.  Again, (3) He commanded the Jews to divorce “strange” wives.  On the other hand, the prophet does say that God “hates” if a person divorces a Scriptural spouse which results in tears upon His altar.

(1) DIVORCE IS ALLOWED IN BOTH TESTAMENTS

It is generally conceded that the original purpose of marriage is recorded in Genesis when God creates both male and female.  “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2: 24).   

DUE TO HARDNESS OF HEARTS. Jesus' explanation of the nature of marriage in, e.g., Matthew 19, is from the Greek translation of Genesis:  man shall cleave to (literally, “be glued” [Mounce, #G4347] but figuratively “abide with”) his wife and they two are to be “one flesh.”  This was God's creative intent.  But sin coming into the world caused God to permit divorce. For example, Jesus said (Matthew 19:5), “Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.” Jesus referred to Moses as God's prophet who gave God's law that suffered, i.e., "permitted" [x] divorce. "From the first" emphasizes God's original design and intent for marriage. But sin (also in the Garden) hardened man's heart.   Jesus even "upbraided" His close apostles because they had had "hardness of hearts" concerning His resurrection (Mark 16:14).

SOME COMMANDS AND ALLOWANCES ARE IN BOTH OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.  The Law (OT) has been replaced by the Lord's Testament for His Kingdom after His crucifixion.  His death not only saved the faithful under the OT (Hebrews 9:15) but it replaced its authority.  Jesus' Kingdom is compared to “an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old” (Matthew 13:57).  Some “old” things are brought “forth” into the “new”, but some are not.  For example, some things “brought forth” are from the Ten Commandments which are included in “love your neighbor” (Romans 13:9). But one exception is the fourth COMMANDMENT, the “seventh day sabbath.”  There is a new “sabbath” rest awaiting at death: “Then there is left a Sabbath rest G4520 to the people of God” (Hebrews 4:9, ABP+) “when they shall rest from their works like God did His” (v. 10, ABP+).

The same thing occurs with the marriage law.  Some rules are “brought forth” over to the New.  The original commands for marriage included “Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth” (Genesis 1:28; repeated to Noah, 9:1, 7).[iii]   Now this law is apparently modified by the New Testament [iv] by Jesus who taught in Matthew 19:12 that one did not have to marry “for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake.” This coincides with Paul's statement of his being gifted by being able to contain without seeking marriage (1 Corinthians 7:7-9).

DIVORCE ALLOWED FOR OT CAUSE OF (HEBREW) ERVAH.  The rule for divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1ff) is “brought forth” by Jesus (e.g., in the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5:31,32 and 19:9 and later by Paul[v]). Of course, Jesus would not have repudiated Moses before the cross (He condemned anyone that would: “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.”)  Jesus rather explains Deuteronomy 24's “divorce law” but uses this word Greek word for “fornication” for the acceptable reason for divorce while the King James Version[vi] used “uncleanness” (for Hebrew ervah #H6172) in Deuteronomy 24:1-3 as the reason.  The New Testament uses the Greek porneia^#G4202, “fornication”, for the Hebrew ervah#H6172).  For example, 1 Corinthians 5:1 uses the Greek word for “fornication” for one having his father's wife “which is fornication” (which is condemned in Leviticus 18:6; 22:11 as KJV's “nakedness” Hebrew ervah, Strong's #H6172, ). In other words, the NT word “fornication” is the OT word “ervah” translated in KJV'S OT as “nakedness, shame, unclean, uncleanness” (King James Concordance).  When Jesus gave the exception cause for divorce in the New Testament, He quoted Moses' exception (Deuteronomy 24:1)!

(2) GOD PRACTICED DIVORCE: HE DIVORCED ISRAEL.

“I gave faithless Israel her certificate of divorce and sent her away because of all her adulteries” (Jeremiah 3:8-10; cf. Isaiah 54:5;  Jeremiah 3:14; 31:32).  God divorced (northern) Israel for cause and yet Judah did the same thing.  We can reason that since the Lord “married” the church (Ephesians 5:23,24) then God (had) divorced Judah as well (2 Corinthians 11:2).  “And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding[vii] Israel committed adultery, I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also” (Jeremiah 3:8).  The Targum[viii] records, "I caused them to go into captivity, as those that give a bill of divorce (to their wives) and dismiss them.''[ix]  Deuteronomy 24:1-3 authorized such divorces for “uncleanness” (KJV) that Jesus labeled “fornication” in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.

(3) MARRYING OUTSIDE OF THE COVENANT was a sin under the Old Testament Law. 

Judah had married the daughter of a strange god which brought him into close relation with idols and with devils (Malachi 2:11; Joshua 23:12; Exodus 34:10, 16) which broke the Hebrew covenant by that person/s.    It was an abomination and was said to be dealing treacherously (unfaithfully, v. 11).   The man doing this would be “cut off” by God for profaning the holiness of the Lord.  This would happen even though he might otherwise make a “show” of decent worship-offering to God (v.12). 

“STRANGE” WIVES.  God's Law commanded divorce from “strange” wives.  “And Shechaniah the son of Jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said unto Ezra, We have trespassed against our God, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land: yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing.  Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of my lord, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law” (Ezra 10:2,3).

WHO WERE “STRANGE” WIVES?  The Septuagint uses allotrios^G245 for “strange” wives [meaning “not one's own; foreign; not akin, hostile” - Strong's].  The Law specifically forbade making a covenant of any kind with the people of Canaan which included marriage contracts with them.  Repentance under the Law required divorce (Ezra 10:3).  The “strange” wives were those that would not covenant with Israel's God since the lineage of Jesus includes Ruth who was a Moabitess and Rahab the harlot of Jericho (Matthew 1:5).   Ruth had promised Naomi, “thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God” (Ruth 1:16).

THE NEW TESTAMENT “CHANGES” SOME THINGS.  The New Testament changed the Law of this “intermarrying”.  The unbeliever's willingness to dwell with a believer determines the sacred validity of the marriage. “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy” (1 Corinthians 7:14).  Wherein the Jew was required to divorce an alien, there is a change in that Law where divorcing an “unbeliever” is not commanded but that allows an intermarriage to an “alien” to continue if the unbeliever is willing.  That is, the alien must consent (suneudokeō^G4909: “to think well of in common; be gratified with”) to dwell with,”by implication to cohabit” (Strong's).  Since Paul was writing by inspiration, the refusal of the alien to be satisfied in this matter, the Law of divorce could be permitted. Other than this rule one should consider the injunction of a widow to "marry only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39).

BUT GOD HATES DIVORCING A COVENANT WIFE, i.e., a SCRIPTURAL SPOUSE.  OT Judah also had members who were guilty of causing “tears with weeping and crying out” at His altar.  Covenant in the context refers to the legitimate Law of Moses.   These tears were shed because the husband was divorcing them, the “wife of his youth”, “the wife of his covenant” (i.e., legitimately an Israelite or convert) against whom he is dealing treacherously by putting her (the innocent wife) away.  Such an act God hated.  According to Jesus to divorce a legitimate spouse causes her to commit adultery just like it did under the Old Testament.  Paul recomfirms this in 1 Corinthians 6 and 7.  To prevent fornication (uncleanness, ervah) both husband and wife must faithfully cohabit with (and only with) the legitimate spouse.

Finally, divorce is not fun. God did not enjoy divorcing Israel. But God's justice demanded it. For a divorce to be excepted and initiated, fornication must have occurred. Fornication is a sin (1 Corinthians 6:18). Vows are broken which is condemned (Ecclesiastes 5:5). For the best scenario, all free participants must ponder seriously beforehand if marrying is for them and if so, both must determine to work with one another and stick with their companion according to God's sacred design.

     --   Gaylon West
                 Checked by J. W. Ward

---

[i]     “Which Divorcee Does God Hate?”  The Harvester, vol. 42, no. 10.

[ii] In the appendix of my marriage book I include a history of “church” lawmen who determined and changed the laws of marriage and divorce.  Marriages Designed In Heaven. Available online at lulu.com/shop and Amazon,"books by Gaylon West", etc.

[iii] Sefer Hachinuch counts the statement to Adam, “be fruitful and multiply,” as the first commandment of the  Torah . https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4013732/jewish/Be-Fruitful-and-Multiply-The-Commandment-to-Raise-Children.htm.  John Gill's Exposition of the Bible disagrees in this being a command. 

[iv] https://www.crosswalk.com/family/marriage/what-does-the-bible-say-about-marriage.html

[v] 1 Corinthians 7:3, “Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband”, etc.

[vi] Deuteronomy 24:1, “When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness (Hebrew ervah; Greek “fornication” “ Jesus uses) in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.” God's design for marriage is violated by “uncleanness.”

[vii] “backsliding.”  Hebrew meshûbâh. “turning away.”

[viii] Targum: Aramaic for “translation”.  any of several translations of the Hebrew Bible or portions of it into the Aramaic language.

[ix] According to John Gill's Exposition of the Bible: Jeremiah 3:8.

[x] Popular New Testament comments "In the original state in Paradise." Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary: "Tolerated a relaxation of the strictness of the marriage bond - not as approving of it, but to prevent still greater evils." Vincent's comment on the present perfect active of the verb, along with Robertson's, might contradict the permission by saying the original "continued in force." Present Perfect active verb is completely done, with results still felt in the present (completed aspect)."--https://ancientgreek.pressbooks.com/chapter/42/ My comment: Hence, God's intended design continues with violations such as fornication and idolatry affecting current outcome such as was allowed by Moses and Jesus.

my book on marriage/divorce

 !
!           choice of 2 bindings