Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 7

What exactly did Jesus mean about the exception clause in Matthew 19:9?

Matthew 19:9 - And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.

The word "sexual immorality" is not the best translation. In the Greek, it should be "porneia", which covers a whole list of things including incest, idolatry, adultery, harlotry, etc.

However, while it is important to know the Greek word and its meaning, it is more important to know the context of the passage so that you know how it should be used.

Matthew was specific in using "porneia". In this context, it was not adultery. Why?

1. Under the Law, those who committed adultery would be stoned to death. (Deut 22:22; Lev 20:10)

2. Matthew used a different Greek word "moichao" for adultery (see Matt 19:9; Matt 5:32; Matt 5:27)

In 1 Cor 6:9, Paul listed one whole list of characteristics. Immorality (porneia) and adultery (moichao) are distinctively separated, though in the same list.

Some translations like KJV translated "porneia" as "fornication". It is probably one of the best English translations for this particular word.

In the context of Matthew 19, Jesus was tested by two schools of Pharisees - the Hillel & the Shammai (see Part 5 for more understanding). The former believed that you can divorce your wife for any reason, while the latter believed that you can divorce only on the ground of adultery.

They based it on Deut 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 in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. (emphasis added)

In Matt 19:9, Jesus did not say "Yes" or "No" to their question (Matt 19:3). He explained the marriage Covenant from God's original intent in the beginning (Matt 19:4-6). Then He gave the revelation to the UNCLEANNESS in Deut 24:1.

Remember: Old Testament is New Testament concealed. New Testament is Old Testament revealed.

Matthew 19:9 (KJV) - And I say unto you, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for FORNICATION (porneia), and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." (emphasis and Greek added).

In other words, "porneia" is the revelation of "uncleanness" in Deut 24:1.

In the New Covenant, apostle Paul did not include this exception clause.

In Mark 10 and Luke 16, both of them did not include the exception clause.

Mark 10:11-12 - So He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Luke 16:18 - "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery."

Mark and Luke were written to the Gentiles. But Matthew was written to the Jews. Hence, the exception clause must be related to the culture of the Jews!

Matthew 5:32 includes the exception clause too.

"But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of FORNICATION, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery." (emphasis added)

In the Jewish culture of those days, betrothal was a big deal. Once negotiation requirements for the marriage were done by both families and consented by the bride, the groom and the bride entered into a binding agreement. They were officially considered as HUSBAND and WIFE in all legal and religious aspects, except for cohabitation/consummation of marriage. Betrothal period was usually about twelve months before formal home-taking where the man brought his wife home.

The Jewish law declared that the betrothal is equivalent to an actual marriage and it can only be dissolved by a FORMAL DIVORCE.

When Jesus gave the exception clause in Matthew 19:9 and Matthew 5:32, He was specifically addressing the Jews.

Remember: The Jewish man would only find out if his betrothed wife is a virgin on the night of consummation. The Jewish men expected their wives to be virgins.

Under the Law in Deut 22:13-21, if the man publicly puts away the wife because she is not a virgin, she will be stoned to death.

But if the man simply divorces her (because she is not a virgin) and sends her away from the house, she can go and marry another man. (Deut 24:1-4)

This is why in Matthew 1, we see Joseph planning to divorce Mary secretly!

Matt 1:19 - Then Joseph her husband, being a JUST man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away SECRETLY. (emphasis added)

Joseph was a just man. Righteous. He was observing the Law by divorcing his wife on the biblical ground for divorce - fornication during betrothal! Mary was pregnant and he, in his human wisdom, would never think that it's God. He had thought that Mary committed fornication during the betrothal period. He wanted to put her away secretly so that she would not be stoned to death.

This is the only biblical example of divorce and guess who recorded it? Yes! Matthew!

As Jesus was giving the true intent of God in Matthew 19:9, the exception clause "porneia" in its rightful context was FORNICATION before home-taking of the wife!

In other words, the man did not know that his wife already had sexual relation with other man before they committed to the marriage. If he knew earlier, he might not have wanted to marry her. It's considered a fraud case and the marriage would not be deemed valid in God's eyes.

This is the ONLY ground for divorce Jesus was talking about! 

This is why the disciples of Jesus responded with the following:

Matt 19:10 - His disciples said to Him, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.”

Because they realised that marriage Covenant is for LIFE!

Only death breaks the covenant. 

This is why our marriage vow goes, "...Till death do us part or till Jesus returns (for the believers)."

In this day and age, the exception clause that Jesus talked about hardly or almost never applies to us. Firstly, we don't have the betrothal thingy like the Jewish had in those days. Many women nowadays are not virgins and most men accept that. Once you have accepted, you have NO ground for divorce. Period.

Disclaimer: It doesn't meant that virginity is not important nowadays. See Part 5.

Today, we are thinking of biblical grounds for divorce BECAUSE of our own selfishness and self-centredness.

Marriage is not like Hollywood. We watched too much movies and we thought marriage should be that way. Guess what happens to most "Hollywood" marriages? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to know - they end up in divorce.

Marriage is about Galatians 2:20. You don't live expecting your spouse to love you. You receive perfect Love from the One who is perfect, then you pour out that love on your spouse who is imperfect. Marriage is not about receiving love. It's about giving love. It's about laying down your life for one another. I'm not perfect yet. But I'm Gal 2:20 in progress. Sometimes I have to remind myself that I'm already dead.

1 Corinthians 13 defines love:

1 Cor 13:4-8 - Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, THINKS NO EVIL; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 8 Love never fails. (emphasis added)

Another translation for "thinks no evil" is "keeps no record of wrongs."

Love keeps no record of wrongs. "I can forgive him for all wrongs but not adultery." Look again. Love keeps NO record of wrongs. Now I'm not saying that adultery is a small deal. I'm simply exalting Love above that. Love keeps NO record of wrongs.

We say, "This kind of love is only found in God." But we are called to represent Him. We are called to become Love.

When does your spouse's response have to do with your response? We are not called to live in reaction to others. We are called to live in response to Christ.

Besides, what does your spouse have to do with your own holiness and maturity? It's your own personal walk and intimacy with Christ.

Living a crucified life (Gal 2:20) means it is no longer about me and my expectations. "Love is not self-seeking". It's about Christ who lives in and through me. Hence, my job is to surrender to God and let Christ manifest through me in the marriage. Even if my spouse doesn't love me as much as I love him/her, it doesn't stop me from receiving from Christ's love to love my spouse. We don't receive love first and foremost from our spouse. We receive FIRST from Christ our perfect Bridegroom!

I haven't married for long. Only short 7 years compared to those 40 over and 50 over years. But I realised that on the days when I live a crucified life, my marriage is the happiest. My wife is happy and I am happy. On the days when I decide to have some rights and self-centredness, my marriage is at its worst. That's when quarrels and arguments go on. 

An argument (apart from biblical issues) is simply self-seeking. Period. You and I are dead. There is no more rights. I have to remind myself that. And you need, too.

The more we surrender to Him in a marriage, the more the marriage will blossom. It's the kingdom way. The way of living.

Practical suggestion:

Now that we know that there is basically NO ground for divorce, what should a couple do if the husband is violent and abusive, or has committed adultery?

According to Scriptures, it is still not a biblical ground for divorce. Marriage IS a Covenant. Following Paul's instruction in 1 Cor 7:10-11, the couple can go for separation (not divorce) for a period of time, while each party works out his/her own issue. Though it's easier said than done, the husband may need to go for biblical counseling. Sometimes, it's the wife who needs the counseling. Or even both parties.

There is no specific timeframe. It's either they remain separated or be reconciled to one another (1 Cor 7:10-11).

Since marriage is treasured deeply in the eyes of God, it is important that we choose our partner properly before entering into marriage. It's not a contract for you to sign and break. It's a covenant for life!

Since the devil is out to destroy marriages and virginity (by distorting the original intent of physical union), you can be pretty certain that God regards marriage and purity very highly.

Again I say, marriage IS a LIFETIME Covenant!

Matthew 19:5-6 - For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let NOT man separate.” (emphasis added)

"In the name of Christ, I, ______ take you, ______ to be my husband/wife, to love and to hold from this day forward, for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish until death do us part. This is my solemn vow."

Indeed, only death do us part or when Jesus returns (for the believers).

Finally, we have come to an end on my interpretation of biblical marriage and divorce. As mentioned, I am open for correction so that it can be sharpened further. Only genuine discussions are welcomed.

May God keep and protect all our marriages as we grow in Him. #marriage #covenant

P.S: What about the divorced and the re-married? We will talk about it in the next post titled "God's Heart For The Divorced & The Re-Married."

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 6

If you haven't read Part 1-5, you will not understand this part.

In Part 5, I have explained the original intent of God for marriage as a covenant. Jesus revealed in Matthew 19 that men should not divorce their wives.

He said in Matthew 19:9 - And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

Marriage Covenant is so treasured in the eyes of God that if you divorce your wife to re-marry to someone else (apart from the exception clause), it is regarded as adultery.

We can see that Paul was in line with Jesus' words in 1 Corinthians 7.

1 Cor 7:10-11 - But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should NOT leave her husband 11 (but if she does leave, she must REMAIN unmarried, or else BE RECONCILED to her husband), and that the husband should NOT divorce his wife. (emphasis added)

When Paul said, "not I, but the Lord", he wasn't saying that it was a personal God-directed instruction to him as some claimed to be. He was saying, "The Lord taught on this before. I'm following Jesus' very words that were already spoken by Him." See Matthew 19.

The wife should not leave her husband and the husband should not divorce his wife. The Greek word used for "leave" is "chorizo", which means "separate" or "to leave the spouse --- of divorce". It is the same word used for Matthew 19:6 - "...let no man separate (chorizo)." (Greek word added for clarity)

Note: The woman had the power of effecting a divorce under the Greek and Roman Law. This is why Paul addressed the wife too.

The Greek word for "divorce" in 1 Cor 7:11 is not "apolyos". It is "aphiemi", which also means "send away" or "putting away" - the equivalent of divorce.

Hence, Paul, following the words of Jesus in Matt 19, said that the wife should NOT divorce her husband and vice versa. If the wife (or the husband) were to divorce her husband, she must remain unmarried OR be reconciled to her husband. Why? It would be considered adultery to marry someone else when the husband is still alive (Matt 19:9; Romans 7:3). The marriage covenant is for life!

According to Paul, the only two conditions to be free from this marriage Covenant and to re-marry another is either death of the spouse (1 Cor 7:39; Romans 7:2) or in a marriage where one spouse is a believer and the other is an unbeliever ------ and the unbelieving spouse wants to leave the believing spouse (1 Cor 7:15).

In 1 Cor 7:12, which leads to the instruction in verse 15, Paul said, "But to the rest I say, not the Lord..."

Some claimed that this was not from God. They argued that it was simply Paul's personal view. Nothing is further from the truth. When Paul said, "...I say, not the Lord", he was saying, "Jesus did not teach about this before." Thus, Paul was speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 7:40; 2 Timothy 3:16). If you don't believe it is inspired by God, then you can tear off that part, or throw away your Bible.

Let's look at the only two conditions to be free from marriage Covenant:

1 Cor 7:39 - A wife is bound AS LONG AS her husband LIVES; but if her husband is dead, she is FREE to be married to whom she wishes, ONLY IN THE LORD. (emphasis added)

1 Cor 7:15 - Yet if the UNBELIEVING one leaves, LET HIM LEAVE; the brother or the sister is NOT under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace. (emphasis added)

A wife whose husband has passed on is known as a widow. Paul confirmed that a widow can re-marry in verse 8-9. In fact, in 1 Timothy 5:14, he encouraged young widows to re-marry due to some issues.

1 Cor 7:8-9 - But I say to the UNMARRIED and to WIDOWS that it is good for them if they remain even as I. 9 But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. (emphasis added)

Do note that in those days, it was more common for the women to live longer than their husbands. Hence, Paul used the word "widows" to instruct the Corinthian Church. The same principle should be applied to widowers.

The word "unmarried" is likely referred to single men and single women (who are not virgins). We will see this in later part of this article.

However, some claimed that the word "unmarried" refer to the divorced. As mentioned in Part 3, they likely interpreted based on 1 Cor 7:34 (NASB):

"The woman who is UNMARRIED, AND the VIRGIN, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband." (emphasis added)

It is believed that since the virgin is already single, the unmarried must be the divorced. 

This is a flawed interpretation. We can see from Scriptures that the virgin doesn't refer to the single in general. It is specifically referred to the single WOMAN (1 Cor 7:28; 1 Cor 7:34, 36-38).

If the word "unmarried" refers to the divorced, 1 Cor 7:8-9 will become as follows:

"But I say to the UNMARRIED (DIVORCED) and to WIDOWS that it is good for them if they remain even as I. 9 But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. (emphasis and "divorced" added)

Firstly, it's unlikely that Paul did not address any single man in the Church for the issue of marriage and sexual immorality. In fact, he would rather the men remain single as he was.

Do note that 1 Cor 7:1-2 is not talking about single men. Paul was speaking about married couples. He said, "...each man is to HAVE his own wife." The word "have" in Greek is to "possess". It speaks of sexual relations in a marriage. Verse 3-5 confirms the context.

Secondly, Paul would then contradict what he said in 1 Cor 7:39, that the woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. She is still bound even if she is divorced. The only way to be set free from that bondage is when her husband dies.

Thirdly, if we read the whole context of 1 Cor 7:32-34, we will realise that the unmarried is used for single man (based on context) but the VIRGIN is always used for single woman.

1 Cor 7:32-34 - But I want you to be free from concern. One who is UNMARRIED is concerned about the things of the Lord, how HE may please the Lord; 33 but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried, and the VIRGIN, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that SHE may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband. (emphasis added)

We can see clearly that v32-33 is talking about the man while v34 is talking about the woman. The virgin is ONLY used for single women and not single men.

In the Greek, verse 34 could be translated as "The woman unmarried AND virgin cares for the things of the Lord..." 

It could also be translated as "The woman unmarried, (also, even) virgin, cares for the things of the Lord..."

You cannot be divorced and still be virgin. The misled interpretation that "unmarried" is "divorced" is clearly inconsistent with Scriptures.

Even we interpret based on NASB, it is as follows:

"The woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband."

The woman who is UNMARRIED can be a single woman who is no longer a virgin. She cannot be a widow, because Paul is specific to address a widow as "widow". She cannot be a divorcee, because Paul allows the unmarried to marry (1 Cor 7:9).

Hence, it is possible that the unmarried woman can be a believing woman whose unbelieving husband left her (1 Cor 7:15) or a single woman who is not a virgin (i.e. prostitute --- since prostitution and immorality were prevalent in those days in Corinth).

In a nutshell, Paul gave the following instructions:

1. Unmarried men and women, widows and virgins can remain single (encouraged by Paul due to certain advantages and "present distress") OR marry

2. Divorced are not allowed to re-marry. They either remain unmarried or be reconciled to their spouses

3. Believing spouse whose unbelieving spouse left her/him can re-marry or remain unmarried

Notice, No. 2 is completely in line with Jesus' words in Matthew 19:9 - And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

This is why Paul would not permit the divorced to re-marry based on Jesus' words (1 Cor 7:10-11).

In Matthew 19:9, however, Jesus seemed to give an exception clause for divorce. Many believed that Jesus was referring to adultery or sexual immorality.

In Part 7, we will conclude on what this exception clause really meant.

Additional note: It is very likely that apostle Paul was once married. To be the Pharisee of the Pharisees, you must be married. It is considered a duty to be married in that sect. You will be judged for not marrying. Furthermore, to be a member of the Sanhedrin, you have to be married. Thus, Paul's wife could have died earlier or left him (she was an unbeliever) when he became a believer. We don't know what happened because the Bible was silent on that.

P.S: Again, I thought I would need to repeat and emphasize that these articles are not targeted at those who are divorced, re-married or are going through marital issues. It is meant to preserve what the Word says. In the final post, we will talk about God's heart for the divorced and the re-married. He is the Redeemer and perfect Love! #marriage #covenant

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 5

It is true that the Jews were putting away (apolyos) their wives WITHOUT a certificate of divorce (apostasion) in those days. However, as we explained in Part 4, Jesus wasn't addressing the issue of "putting away" in Matt 15. He was addressing the issue of divorce.

The cruel practice of putting away without a certificate of divorce was a Jewish law, not the Mosiac Law. In other words, the Jews who practised that did not follow the Law of Moses. They came up with their own law. This is the reason why God had to instruct Moses to give the Law in Deut 24:1 ---- the Jewish men must give their wives the certificate of divorce. That also meant that the Jewish man, upon the legal divorce, had to return the dowry (a large sum) and the sum of claims written in the marriage contract (known as Ketubah) to his wife. No wonder the men refused to give their wives the certificate of divorce. 

Do bear in mind that Deut 24:1 was the Law under the Old Covenant. But it was not God's original intent.

With this, we will look at what Jesus meant in Matt 19.

Matt 19:3 - The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”

The word "divorce" is "apolyos", which means "putting away", but we have already established in Part 4 that "apolyos" is the SAME as divorce.

When it comes to interpretation, while it is important to find out the original Greek word, it is even more important to find out the context of how the Greek word is used in that verse, the passage, the chapter and the Bible itself. Failing which, you can easily bend the Greek word for your own interpretation.

The Pharisees came to test Jesus. There were two schools of the Pharisees: the Hillel & the Shammai. The Hillel believed that you can divorce your wife for any reason. For example, if she didn't cook your dinner properly, you can divorce her. The Shammai, however, believed that you can only divorce your wife if she has committed adultery.

Both schools of the Pharisees were here to test Jesus, hoping to find fault with Him, so that He might end up like John the Baptist - killed.

John the Baptist was just beheaded earlier, because he spoke against King Herod for marrying his brother, Philip's wife (Matt 14:3).

According to history, Philip was still living at that time. I strongly believe so. Because if he had died, it would be lawful for Herod to take his wife (Deut 25:5).

John spoke against Herod because it was against the Law to take his brother's wife. According to history and encyclopedia, Herod divorced his own wife to marry Philip's wife, Herodias. Herodias, too, divorced Philip to marry Herod. This was against the Law (Leviticus 20:21; Leviticus 18:16).

With this in mind, let's re-look into Matt 19:3.

Matt 19:3 - The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”

If Jesus were to say "Yes", the Pharisees from the school of Hillel would have taken it as an opportunity to divorce their wives for ANY reason. On the other hand, the Pharisees from the school of Shammai would have used the Mosiac Law (Deut 24:1) to accuse Jesus for breaking it and have Him judged at the Sanhedrin.

If Jesus were to say "No", the Pharisees would have brought Jesus before King Herod and have Him beheaded like John the Baptist. Because it would mean that Herod should not have divorced his own wife to marry his brother's wife! It was immoral.

The Pharisees wanted to trap Jesus. But come on, Jesus is God! In His divine wisdom, He neither said "Yes" or "No." 

He answered according to God's original intent that blew the Pharisees away.

Matthew 19:4-6 - And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,' 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Jesus was quoting from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24. He was pointing to the ORIGINAL intent of God for marriage. In fact, He added one more thing - "Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."

Why did He say that? Because men, in their own desires, wanted divorce. It was men who wanted to separate. We will see that in later verses.

"The two shall become one flesh" speaks of physical union. Eve was made out of Adam's rib in the beginning. It speaks of the depth of intimacy that reflects our intimacy with our Creator. We are One in spirit with God - spiritual union.

Marital relationship is the closest relationship you can ever have, apart from your relationship with God. It is a Covenant, just as God has a Covenant with you because of Jesus.

A Covenant is more than a bond or contract. A Covenant is cut by the shedding of blood. Jesus cut an unconditional Covenant with the Father on our behalf. His blood was poured out (Matt 26:28) for us to live in New Covenant.

If you don't understand marriage covenant, you will think that a certificate of divorce (apostasion) and putting away (apolyos) could break the covenant. But marriage covenant was not established by vows and certificate in the beginning. It was established by union - the two become one.

When the man enters the virgin during consummation of marriage, blood is shed and the covenant is cut. The two become one in the eyes of God. What God has joined together, let no man separate. There was NO certificate of marriage in the beginning! Thus, applying the certificate of divorce (apostasion) is NOT God's original intent. It was given in the Old Covenant Law to protect the women!

In the Jewish culture of those days, virginity was treated very seriously (Deut 22). In this day and age, it should also be regarded seriously. It speaks of purity. It is radically precious in the sight of God because it is meant for the man who would be joined together with the woman as one flesh in the marriage. It is the most intimate thing on earth, next to the intimate relationship with God. It is a reflection of heaven on earth (Eph 5:31-32). This is why marriage is regarded as holy.

Disclaimer: It does not mean that without the blood during consummation of marriage, the covenant is not cut. It is still established. What I'm sharing is the original intent. I know that in today's context, many are not virgins and medically speaking, some do not have blood even though they are virgins.

Note: If you (man or woman) have given away your purity, God doesn't judge or condemn you in Christ. He loves you relentlessly. He is our Redeemer! "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. All things have passed away. Behold! All things have become new." (2 Cor 5:17) He has washed away the past with the Blood of Jesus. You are as white as snow. He has restored your purity. You gave away in the past because you did not know better. But now that you know, you can preserve the new purity for the one in marriage.

Jesus said "Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate." (v6) Notice, this is pointing to the beginning - the original intent of marriage between a man and a woman. If Jesus said "let not man separate," why are we trying to use apolyos and apostasion to legally separate (divorce) what God has joined together?

I'm going to drive this point it further.

Matthew 19:7-8 - They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”

8 He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, PERMITTED you to divorce your wives, but from THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO. (emphasis added)

The two schools of Pharisees wondered, "If divorce is not God's original intent, then why was it given in the Mosiac Law?"

Jesus answered, "Because of the hardness of your hearts..." In other words, because of your refusal to obey God (Rom 2:5; Heb 3:7). 

Why? "...from the BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO". Jesus was saying that the Jews refused to obey God's original intent to stay as one flesh - the marriage covenant (Matt 19:4-6; Mark 10:5-9).

Jesus continued in verse 9.

Matthew 19:8-9 - He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

Not only was God's original intent stated by Jesus in Matt 19:4-6, Jesus brought it further to reveal that the men should not divorce their wives. This is in line with Deut 22:28-29 and 1 Cor 7:10-11.

In Part 6, I will explain on 1 Corinthians 7 and hopefully on why Jesus said what He said in Matthew 19:9. #marriage #covenant

Dad & Son's Thankfulness Episode

Recently, Mummy bought a Tobot toy for J. While watching his show, he accidentally broke it. Hence, he was very sad. He asked me to buy the same toy for him. And he added, "Papa, can you buy two?"

I replied, "No. We need to learn to be thankful and be contented." He cried and threw a tantrum. Well, I did not give in. I didn't even think of buying the same toy which he broke.

On the way to bus stop, God spoke to me, "It is the goodness of God that leads him to repentance. Buy it for him, though he was the one who break it. And teach him to value the toy."

So I bought it for him and taught him to take ownership of his toy. That was on Friday. On that evening, he said, "Papa, can you buy one more for me? I don't have the helicopter Tobot." I replied, "J, didn't I just buy one for you when you broke one? We need to be contented and be thankful."

J: But I don't have the helicopter Tobot.

Papa: Well, we may buy next time. Not so soon.

J: How about tomorrow?

Papa: That's too soon.

J: Okay. How about Sunday?

Papa: That's still too soon.

J: How about next Saturday?

Papa: Let's wait a little longer and we'll see.

Today, I decided to buy Veggie Tale for him to watch. I gave him two choices (I kind of indirectly directed his choice). So he ended up choosing the episode on "Thankfulness". Yeah! That's my motive haha.

Before we went home to watch Veggie Tale, he requested to go to the toy shop. He explained that he just wanted to see toys. We went there and he held the helicopter Tobot closely under his arm.

I said, "Why are you holding onto the Tobot?"

J: I just want to hold it.

Papa: But we are not going to buy it.

J: Ya. I just want to hold it.

He was really hoping to buy it. He thought that by holding it long enough, I would buy it for him. Unfortunately, his Daddy was firm not to do so because his son needed to learn to be thankful.

After he finished watching Veggie Tale on "Thankfulness", I explained the story in the context of toys and he understood. Yay God!

Then I gave him one piece of Vit C gummy. He looked at it and asked, "Why is it only one?"

I answered, "Remember about thankfulness?" He nodded and said, "Yes. Need to be thankful and not greedy. Later the stomach BURSTS."

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

I had to walk away before I suffered from internal injury. 🤣🤣🤣

#thankfulness #fathering101 #dadandsonepisode

P.S: He saw the Daddy character in Veggie Tale and asked me, "Why that Daddy doesn't have goatee like you?" 😂😂😂

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 4

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 4

Note: You have to read Part 1, 2 and 3 to understand part 4.

The view of "putting away" (apolyos) as unacceptable by God, and divorce with valid grounds (mentioned in Part 3) as legal in God's eyes is flawed in various areas.

In Part 2, I shared that the Christian Jewish Rabbi and many others reasoned that you need BOTH putting away (apolyos) AND a certificate of divorce (apostasion) to issue a legal divorce in God's eyes.

Two passages quoted are as follows:

Deuteronomy 24:1 - When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, AND sends her out of his house. (emphasis added)

Matthew 19:7 - They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, AND to put her away?” (emphasis added)

As you can see, it is believed that you need the word "AND", which means that both things are required.

If the verse only states "putting away" (apolyos), it does not constitute a divorce. For example, in Matthew 19:9 - "...whoever divorces (apolyos) his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

Thus, it is argued that Jesus wasn't addressing the issue of divorce because only one element (apolyos) is mentioned.

This is really a flawed interpretation. Why?

Deut 24:1-4 (KJV) - 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 in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, AND send her out of his house. 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 4 Her FORMER husband, which SENT her AWAY, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; (emphasis added)

Look at verse 4. Clearly, it is referring to the first husband who divorced her (v1). This time, the Bible only mentioned one thing - "sending/putting away", without a certificate of divorce (apostasion). Based on the divorce theory that you need two things in a verse to constitute a legal divorce, the Bible reveals otherwise. Because "putting away" IS THE SAME AS DIVORCE.

Next, we see how flawed the argument in Matthew 19 is.

Matthew 19:7-8 - They say unto him, "Why did Moses then command to give a writing of DIVORCEMENT, AND to PUT her AWAY?"

8 He saith unto them, "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to PUT AWAY your wives: but from the beginning it was not so."

It is argued that Jesus, in v8, only addressed the issue of putting away (apolyos) because the certificate of divorce (apostasion) is not mentioned.

It is ironic to interpret this way without seeing the clear context of this verse. The word "suffered" in Greek is "epitrepo", which means "permit." 

Jesus said, "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts PERMITTED you to put away (apolyos) your wives: but from the beginning it was not so."

If you argue that Jesus was only addressing "putting away" (apolyos), you are also saying that the Mosiac Law permitted "putting away" without a certificate of divorce! 

WRONG! Absolutely contradicting! The Mosaic Law did NOT permit that. It only permitted divorce (Deut 24:1). Therefore, Jesus was addressing the issue of divorce!

Let's look at Mark 10:3-5 - And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses COMMAND you? 4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, AND to put her away. 5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this PRECEPT. (emphasis added)

Clearly, v5 reveals that Jesus was not simply addressing the issue of "putting away". He was addressing the PRECEPT that the Pharisees quoted from Moses in the Torah. The word "precept" in Greek is "entole", which means "commandments of the Mosiac Law." Again, Jesus was addressing the issue of DIVORCE.

Matthew 5:31-32 - It hath been said, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement." 32 But I say unto you, "That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery."

Every time when Jesus said, "It has been said..." in Sermon on the Mount, He referred to the Law. And when He added, "But I say to you...", He was giving the true intent of God's heart. Compare with Matthew 5:27-28 and you will understand.

Jesus, in verse 32, was revealing the original intent that there should NOT even be a divorce, except for a clause.

Now it is shown from Scriptures that you don't need the two things (apolyos AND apostasion) in a verse to prove that it is talking about divorce. Because "putting away" (apolyos) in the context of marriage REFERS TO DIVORCE.

Malachi 2:16, in the ESV translation, says, "For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her," says the Lord, the God of Israel, "covers his garment with violence," says the Lord of hosts.

Yes. The word "divorce" there is "putting away". But we have already established that "putting away" is the SAME as "divorce". 

In the Hebrew language for Malachi 2:16, it is not so clear that God is the One who hates divorce. The Septuagint (Greek translation of OT) refers to the husband who hates his wife and divorces her. 

Having said that, even if the interpretation is God Himself who hates divorce, there is a valid reason, for the husband has dealt treacherously with his wife (Mal 2:15) in that context. Many of the Jewish men divorced their wives because of their own selfishness and desires, leaving the wives to protect themselves with no providence.

The question, therefore is, if God is not for divorce, why did He divorce Israel?

First of all, Israel broke their covenant (Jeremiah 31:32) with God by committing spiritual adultery (idolatry). See Jeremiah 3:8.

Secondly, God and Israel did not have an unconditional covenant. It was a Mosaic covenant (Exodus 19:5-8; Deut 5:1-26) that is conditional.

Judah committed the same sin as Israel; in fact, she was worse than Israel (Jeremiah 3:9-11). But God never ever divorced Judah. Why? He had a covenant with King David where the Messiah would eventually be born from his lineage. (2 Samuel 7:12-16; 2 Kings 8:19)

While God did divorce Israel, He still recognised the "marriage" (Jeremiah 3:14) and promised to re-marry Israel through the resurrected Christ (Jeremiah 3:14-22; Jeremiah 31:31; Rom 7:2-4), because under the Law, God couldn't take back His divorced wife (Deut 24:4, Jeremiah 3:1).

What an awesome and loving God we have when it was the wife (Israel) who dealt treacherously with the husband (God). He is totally opposite from the Jewish men who dealt treacherously with their wives and divorced them.

In the next part, I will explain on 1 Corinthians 7 and Matthew 19 further. Eventually, we want to find out what God truly sees in a marriage and what kind of exception clause He really has for a divorce. #marriage #covenant

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 3

If you haven't read Part 1 and Part 2, you may find it difficult to understand what I'm sharing here.

As mentioned in Part 2, the new interpretation of Matthew 19 where Jesus was addressing the unjust issue of Jewish husbands putting away (apolyos) their wives without a certificate of divorce (apostasion) leads to what is now termed as biblical divorce in the eyes of God. In other words, it is believed (and Scripturally argued) that God permits divorce and doesn't regard it as a sin.

Even the traditional view of Malachi 2:16 is apparently, to be interpreted as follows:

“For the Lord God of Israel says that He hates DIVORCE, for it covers one’s garment with violence,” says the Lord of hosts. "Therefore take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.” (emphasis added)

The word "divorce" in KJV is "putting away". In the Hebrew, the word "divorce" is "shalach", which has the same meaning as the Greek "apolyos". It means "put away."

Hence, it is argued that God doesn't hate divorce. What He hates is husbands PUTTING AWAY their wives without granting them a certificate of divorce. That causes the women to be bound and chained (as agunahs) without any freedom to live their lives. That in itself, is cruelty.

Furthermore, God HIMSELF put away Israel and gave her a certificate of divorce when she persisted in idolatry (spiritual adultery).

Jeremiah 3:8 - And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding 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. (Emphasis added).

This is it! God Himself divorced Israel. He did the very TWO things in the Torah (the Law) - apolyos AND apostasion.

How can God hate divorce if He Himself divorced His chosen nation? How can God not permit divorce when He Himself did it?

1 Corinthians 7 seems to nail the point if you interpret the word "unmarried" as those who have divorced instead of those who are single.

I believe that this interpretation is due to 1 Corinthians 7:34 (NASB):

"The woman who is UNMARRIED, AND the VIRGIN, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband." (emphasis added)

A virgin is already a single. Thus, it is believed that the unmarried woman must be referred to something else instead of a single.

Many of the English translations have probably translated it wrongly as follows:

"There is a DIFFERENCE between a WIFE and a VIRGIN. The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the world—how she may please her husband." (emphasis added)

When I looked into the Greek, I realised that NASB translated the verse closest to its original meaning.

Hence, replacing the word "unmarried" with divorce, 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 will be as follows:

"But I say to the unmarried (divorced) and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion." ("divorced" added)

With this interpretation, it seems to prove that apostle Paul did not forbid re-marrying for the divorced, though he would rather have them remained unmarried.

You may wonder about the following verses that seem to contradict with the above interpretation.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 - But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband 11 (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.

Firstly, "not I, but the Lord" is interpreted as Paul being directed by God to give the instructions. And "I say, not the Lord" (verse 12) is interpreted as Paul giving his own personal view (not directed by God). This is a flawed interpretation that we will talk about later.

Verse 10 and 11 is believed to be talking about separation, not divorce. The context of this interpretation lies in verse 5:

"Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer."

It is believed that the couple is separated to work things out in the marriage for a period of time. Thus, during this separation, Paul did not allow a divorce, in hope that things can be worked out. Long separation is not encouraged, as it may lead to temptation.

With these explanations, on what ground does it warrant a biblical divorce?

Deut 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 in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. (emphasis added)

The word "uncleanness" in Septuagint (Greek translation) is "aschemon" which means "unseemly, indecent."

The Christian Jewish Rabbi said that when Jesus spoke about the exception clause in Matthew 19:9, He was referring to indecent/inappropriate behaviour, pointing back to Deuteronomy 24:1.

"And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for FORNICATION, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." (emphasis added)

The word "fornication" is not the best translation. In Greek, it is "porneia", where you get the English word "pornography." Porneia has a wide spectrum of various meanings such as incest, harlotry, idolatry, etc, but it is not adultery. Under the Law, if you commit adultery, you will be stoned to death. So it is believed that Jesus wasn't talking about adultery as the exception clause.

The Jewish Christian Rabbi explained that "porneia" should be pointed back to Deut 24:1, indicating that Jesus was quoting from there. If that is true, it should mean "indecent or inappropriate behaviour."

In other words, there are many grounds for divorce, such as abusing your wife, shaming her in public, etc., because these are indecent and inappropriate behaviours.

Of course, even with this belief, it is taught that divorce should be the last option and couple should work things out carefully in a marriage.

Are all these really what the Word is saying?

It is interesting that some readers thought that what I wrote in Part 2 is actually biblical, which goes to show how strong this view is backed up with Scriptures. I cannot imagine how this is going to open up many divorces in church.

Having presented what seems to be biblical truths in Part 2 and Part 3 (today), it is important to find out what the Word really says IN CONTEXT. We need to give an answer from the Word when there are so many kinds of teachings going around. More so because this is a vital topic that involves families - husbands, wives and children.

To interpret Scriptures (more accurately), we first need the Holy Spirit to illuminate the truth to us. No amount of studying/knowledge can reveal to us the truth except through the Spirit of truth (John 16:13) and the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:10-16). This is why some seminary trained people can still believe in cessation of gifts and other interesting stuff. I'm not saying that seminary is bad. It definitely has its role and purpose. But just as going into the Four Fingers doesn't make me become a Korean fried chicken, going into the seminary doesn't make you become the walking truth. Seeking for truth with the guidance of the Holy Spirit is a life-long journey that we must never stop. Sometimes, what we know can really keep us from what we need to know.

In Part 4, I will share what I personally believe is truth in context against what is being shared in Part 2 and Part 3 (today) by the Jewish Christian Rabbi and other men and women sharing his same view from the pulpit. And yes, I disagree with them from the Word.

We will also be looking at what Jesus really meant in Matthew 19:9 about the exception clause.

Note: There will be a final post on God's heart for the divorced and re-married. He sees them the same way as He sees anyone of us ---- precious sons and daughters. We must NEVER EVER label them. What a loving God we have! Jesus!

#marriage #covenant

P.S: Do bear with me as I lay the foundation to the final point. Truly, truly, I say to you, it shall only tarry for now. But it shall not tarry forever :)

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 2

According to the Christian Jewish Rabbi's (see Part 1) understanding of marriage, divorce and re-marriage, it is believed that Jesus was addressing an important issue of "putting away" in Matthew 19.

Matthew 19:3-9 - The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?” 4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” 7 They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” 8 He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

Our English translation of the Bible is indeed not the best translation. Most of the time, NASB and ESV have better literal translation than many other versions. However, KJV at times, gives a close translation to the Greek language.

For the case of Matthew 19, KJV gives a closer translation of the Greek word "apolyos", which means "put away, send away, dismiss, etc."

Matthew 19:3 (KJV) - The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away (apolyos) his wife for every cause? (Greek word added for clarity)

In those days (and today), it was prevalent for the Jewish men to put away their wives without having a legal divorce. In the Jewish law known as a "get", if the wife is put away without a legal divorce, she is NOT allowed to re-marry. She has to remain single. She is known as an agunah. She will be regarded as a second-class citizen and her kids, if any, will be regarded as bastards. She will be cast aside for the rest of her life. Yet, for the husband, he can continue to find a new wife. This is brutally unjust for the women. And even till today (this day and age), they are helpless.

With this context, let's re-look at the passages in Matthew 19 according to what is being taught worldwide now. Men and women of God from the pulpit are trying to reveal the love of God to protect the women, the divorced and women who wanted to re-marry or have re-married. The heart intent is honorable and I honour their heart to love.

Matthew 19:3 - The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away (apolyos) his wife for every cause?

There were two schools of the Jews: the Hillel and the Shammai. The former believed that you can put away your wife for any reason - for example, she didn't cook your dinner properly. The latter school believed that you can only put away your wife if she commits adultery.

It is believed that the Pharisees wanted to test Jesus whether they could put away (apolyos) their wives for any reason, without giving them a certificate of divorce.

This interpretation is based on the Torah in Deut 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 in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, AND send her out of his house. (emphasis added)

The word "send" in the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament) is the same word "apolyos".

Hence, it is believed that in order to prove a legal divorce, you need two things.

1. apolyos (put away)

2. a certificate/bill of divorcement ("apostasion" in Greek)

If the husband only apolyos his wife without giving her apostasion, it is NOT a legal divorce.

In Matthew 19:3, the Pharisees asked Jesus, "Can a man apolyos his wife for any reason?"

Jesus answered in v4-6 - And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

It is believed that there are marriages where God has joined together and there are marriages that God did not join together. These marriages were joined by men because of their own desires. If God were to join the marriage together, there won't be the issue of divorce. However, to legally separate the married couple in God's eyes, it has to be done according to God's law - you need apolyos and apostasion. With both of these, the couple is now separated into two from one flesh.

This explains the next verse 7 - They say unto him, "Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement (apostasion), AND to put her away (apolyos)?" (Greek words and emphasis added)

The Jews knew they needed BOTH apolyos and apostasion for a legal divorce in God's eyes. It must be these TWO things.

Jesus responded in verse 8-9 - He saith unto them, "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to PUT AWAY your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall PUT AWAY his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is PUT AWAY doth commit adultery." (emphasis added)

Notice, in both verses 8 and 9, Jesus only addressed the issue of putting away (apolyos) and not apostasion (certificate of divorce). This is the reason why it is believed that the wife commits adultery if she marries someone else. She does not have apostasion to be considered legally divorced in God's eyes.

"The hardness of your hearts" is not that you stop loving your wife, but a refusal to obey God's law (Rom 2:5; Heb 3:7). It is thus, believed that the Jews, because of the hardness of hearts and because of the refusal to obey God's law, chose to apolyos their wives WITHOUT granting them apostasion. In other words, they intentionally refused to divorce their wives legally but cause the wives to suffer for the rest of their lives being agunahs.

With this in mind, it seems reasonable and valid why under such a case, re-marrying is adultery, because the woman is not legally divorced in the first place.

Does this warrant a biblical divorce in God's eyes? I will explain more in Part 3.

P.S: To understand the context of Jewish culture and the issue of putting away, check out the two video links I put out in Part 1.

Disclaimer: This sharing is not targeted at anyone who is divorced, re-married or is going through marital issues. It serves as a desire to preserve the Word for what it is. As mentioned in Part 1, you are free to have healthy discussions. I am open to be corrected so that the Word can be further clarified. It is too serious a topic to stay ignorant.

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 1

This is off-topic from Fathering but it represents the Father God's heart on marriage.

Marriage Is An Unconditional Covenant Part 1

There has been many teachings on marriage, divorce and re-marriage all over the world. Recently, I stumbled upon a teaching by a man who has a significant sphere of influence internationally.

He taught a convincing message about divorce and how it is biblically legal in the eyes of God. For a moment, I was gripped by the message. Because of strong Scripture references, as well as strong back-up from a Jewish Christian Rabbi (who also taught the Scriptures with clear Hebrew and Greek) who fully understood the Jewish culture, I was pretty affected. I knew that I could not simply say that divorce is not accepted by God. I could not simply say that "your teachings are wrong". For you to say that divorce is not accepted by God, you cannot just use "God hates divorce" from Malachi 2. Because many argued that the Hebrew word there is "put away" - a cultural Jewish practice that was and still is predominant now. Apparently, you can put away your wife and not grant her a divorce. She can't re-marry, but you can. It is believed that Jesus was addressing the issue of "putting away" in Matthew 19, Mark 10 and Luke 16.

Hence, I needed to go back to the Scriptures and study clearly before I could reason appropriately. I spent much time dwelling on it and meditating on it. Even when I lie on my bed to sleep, my whole mind was on it.

It is a topic that is too important to be ignorant. A single, wrong interpretation can destroy many marriages and lives in the church. And while I'm just an ordinary father, I strongly urge leaders to study and pray through this topic seriously. Because lives are in their hands. They are accountable to God for the flocks.

Our belief, without clear Scriptural understanding, is built on the shaky sand. Unless we can clearly explain and reason from Scriptures, we need to go back and study over and over and over again.

Because of the seriousness of this topic, I suggest that anyone doesn't simply take what I am going to share, but go back to the Word for yourself.

At the same time, I welcome healthy discussions (hostile comments will be removed) so that it can be sharpened deeper. And I am open to be corrected.

Marrriage is an unconditional covenant. It is NOT a certificate or contract where you can legally break.

Matthew 19:5-6 - For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Malachi 2:14 - Yet she is your companion and your wife by COVENANT. (emphasis added)

For those who are interested to hear the new understanding on marriage, divorce and re-marriage, check out this man's teaching here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2Zi4LTqlRA

Disclaimer: I honour this man. By putting out his video teaching, I am by no means judging or criticising him. I love him and I have reasoned with him a little about this topic, though I didn't get the explanations I needed. By putting this video, it gives everyone a fair place to listen to the context and go back to the Word yourself.

For those who are interested to know the Jewish culture and how the Jewish Christian Rabbi explained the Scriptures using Hebrew and Greek, check out his teaching here:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aVY7S2UOd1s

So many felt liberated and set free by this teaching. But does liberation mean it is truth?

I will explain more in Part 2. #marriage #covenant

P.S: For those who went through a divorce, the love and the grace of God super abounds. He loves you just the same as He loves anyone. He looks at you and says, "You are My precious, beloved, cherished child. You are My lovely bride." There is NO condemnation.