“I am the black sheep in the family.” 
How often have you heard those words? Perhaps you have spoken them. Perhaps you have been saddled with an identity you did not seek, an identity that does not reflect who you really are.
Perhaps you know what it feels like to be the outcast, a misfit, a thorn in the side of those whose norms and expectations strangely – and even irrationally – clash with your own. It is an extremely painful yet common reality for many. Continue reading The Black Sheep
Dear Readers: It will probably take 10-15 minutes to read this piece in its entirety, but if you have doubts or questions about what you have been taught about divorce, I firmly believe your time will be well-spent here.
I pray that seeing the truth brings you closer to the One who loves us and created marriage to reflect the love relationship between our Lord and His bride, the church. I encourage you to share the truth about biblical divorce with others, particularly those held captive in abusive marriages.
I have edited this letter for publishing purposes.
**********
March 10, 2020
Dear Pastor:
My son attends your church, and he recently sent me a link to your sermon on divorce. I appreciate your care and compassion in sharing on this important topic and am writing to offer my feedback, based on my own experience and years of study.
You see, I am a survivor of a 20-year marriage to a “Christian” abuser, and my husband never hit me. These many years later, I am the author of several books, including “Why Is He So Mean to Me?” and “God Is My Witness: Making a Case for Biblical Divorce,” as well as approximately 100 articles on various aspects of the abuse dynamic, and the owner of a web-based ministry called Hurtbylove.com, which has reached tens of thousands of women in at least 42 countries.
My former husband used a combination of verbal, emotional and spiritual abuse strategies to keep me fearful, confused and feeling inadequate as a wife. After we married, he told me that as long as I didn’t catch him in the act of adultery, he could treat me any way he wished, and there was nothing I could do about it.
I’m sure you would agree that such a mindset defies the heart of God for marriage, but I worked tirelessly to earn my husband’s love and devotion. The more he abused me, the harder I tried, and he liked it that way.
Many times over the course of my marriage I sought help and shared the painful truth about the kind of life I was living with my abusive husband. Not once did my believing friends tell me that what I was experiencing was abuse. Nor did I ever hear from the pulpit or from the lips of a Christian counselor that I did not have to live that way. In fact, the opposite was true. Since my husband wasn’t physically abusing me, I was told that I just needed to be more prayerful, loving, forgiving, gentle and submissive, and my husband would surely change. But, the abuse only intensified. The word “divorce” was never mentioned, except in the context of making the church look bad or that self-sacrifice and a rock-solid faith could fix our marriage.
Ultimately, the Spirit Himself released me – and I know the Lord had been prompting me to leave for years, but I didn’t want my life to be a hash mark on the wrong side of the Christian marriage ledger. Nor did I want to be abandoned by God as I had been taught under the “God hates divorce” doctrine. I was damned if I remained, and damned if I left, so I kept trying and praying my husband would turn and love me – and our four children.
The Spirit finally commanded me to leave. God made a way for me and my four wounded children, and for that I am eternally grateful. But it was a grievously lonely road I traveled, and I know I am not alone in my experience. Others’ condemnation of my decision to divorce my abuser and the sense of failure and isolation was deeply felt, contrasted against the Spirit’s gracious affirmation and guidance through that dark time. Today, I know of too many who have not received the kind of emotional and spiritual support – and truth – they need within the Christian pastoral/counseling community.
As a result of this profound conflict, I spent years researching biblical divorce. The Lord has led me to see His powerful, life-giving truth in His Word, a reflection of God’s design for godly marriage as well as His desire to protect women. Knowing what I know now, I am convinced that biblical divorce is perhaps the most misunderstood and misappropriated of all church doctrines.
Having listened to your message on divorce, it seems clear to me that you desire to know the truth, and you seem to have a sincere compassion for those in ungodly marriages. So I would like to share with you what I am certain represents a more accurate view of biblical divorce.
What We Have Been Taught
If all of these things are true, then the prophet Malachi and Jesus essentially contested or even contradicted the Mosaic Law – something unprecedented in Scripture; all divorcees who remarry have committed – and continue to commit – adultery; abuse does not constitute just cause for divorce, and victims of abuse must remain married to their abusers.
If this doesn’t seem consistent with the heart of God for marriage and hurting people, it’s because it isn’t.
Does God Hate Divorce?
“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 indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and 3) puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife…”
Deuteronomy 24:1-2 (New American Standard)
There are three separate aspects to a lawful divorce under the Mosaic law: 1) cause; 2) the provision of a writ of divorcement (“kerithuth,” which literally means “cutting”); and 3) permanent separation, which is known as “putting away” or “sending away” the term for which is“shalach.”
The text of the writ of divorce was given to the wife in a formal ceremony that required witnesses, and it read, in part, “…You are hereby permitted to all men.” According to the writ, she was no longer his wife, he was no longer her husband, and both were free to marry.
This is made clear in the same portion of the law [Deuteronomy 24] which states, “…after she has been sent away from her husband and hath gone and been another man’s wife…”
There was nothing to discourage either one from marrying, nor was either party labeled as a “divorced” person or an adulterer upon a remarriage. The provision of a written release document was intended to invoke a sober understanding of the seriousness and the permanence of the severance of the bond. Furthermore, under the provisions of the “ketubah,” the marriage contract, the provision of a writ of divorce may have also obligated a husband to return her dowry and provide financial compensation to his former wife for a time, and could even place liens on the husband’s assets for this purpose.
The controversy associated with lawful divorce begins with the interpretation of “cause.” As you mentioned, the School of Hillel taught that “cause” meant “any cause at all,” which implied that even the most trivial offense might constitute cause. The School of Shammai taught that “cause” meant “serious” or “legitimate cause,” something so offensive as to merit the severance of the marital bond.
Although you asserted that the interpretation of “cause” was “a shameful thing” and therefore had to be an offense of a sexual nature, that is incorrect. If that were the case, such offenses would have been specified. There was no delineation of specific offenses; it was understood that “cause” was to be a matter of personal conscience and conviction before God. It was also presumed that the divorced woman would become another man’s wife.
Now let’s take this understanding of the Law and apply the lawful aspects of divorce to the notion that “God hates divorce,” as seen in the second chapter of the book of Malachi. The prophet’s pronouncement contains some harsh judgments from the heart of God; however, lawful, for-cause divorce is not the issue.
Malachi 2, beginning at verse 11 reads:
“…[the nation of]Judah has dealt treacherously, and an abomination has been committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah has profaned the sanctuary of the Lord which He loves and has married the daughter of a foreign god… Malachi 2:11
The men of Judah had been perverting the known will of God and rationalizing the Law to accommodate selfish purposes. Their offenses included “putting away” their wives in order to take women who worshiped idols – women who may have even sacrificed their children to false gods – as their wives. This alone was horrendously offensive to the God they claimed to follow, but there is more.
Following the prophet’s condemnation of the nation’s accepted practices as a whole, the prophet seems to confront the priest before him, saying:
“…This is another thing you do: you cover the altar of the Lord with tears, with weeping and with groaning, because He no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand. Yet you say, ‘For what reason?’ Because the Lord has been a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.” Malachi 2:12-14 (New American Standard) (emphasis added)
The prophet said that the Lord stands as a witness on behalf of the wife and against the husband, saying, “For I hate divorce,” says the Lord, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong…” (v. 16)
The word translated “divorce” here in contemporary versions is incorrect. The literal translation reads:
“For I hate putting away, said Jehovah, God of Israel, and He who hath covered violence with his clothing…” (Young’s Literal Translation) (emphasis added)
The term here is not “kerithuth” – the term for divorce, but “shalach,” the term for “putting away.” Men had accepted the practice of putting away their wives rather than lawfully divorcing them in order to take other, idol-worshipping wives.
Note that when the prophet addresses the man before him, he describes his wife as “the wife of his youth,” which implies she had been his companion since they were young but perhaps she was no longer so youthful, and it is plausible that the man had simply tired of her and wished to take a wife from among the heathen.
It is all the more telling that the prophet said, “…though she is your companion and your wife by covenant…” not “was.” It seems the woman was still his wife under the Law. The prophet refers to what was going on as “treacherous” several times during this discourse. “Putting away” a wife did not constitute lawful divorce, but was, in fact, treachery – a betrayal.
Virtually every commentary notes the depth of corruption in Israel and the forms it took, and most commentaries also note that the tears left on the altar (v. 13) are, in fact, evidence of the wives’ heartbreak.
The Matthew Henry Concise Commentary states:
“Corrupt practices are the fruit of corrupt principles; and he who is false to his God, will not be true to his fellow mortals. In contempt of the marriage covenant, which God instituted, the Jews put away the wives they had of their own nation, probably to make room for strange wives.”
In spite of their offenses, these men believed they still deserved God’s favor. But the prophet scolds them saying,
“You have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet you say, “How have we wearied Him?” In that you say, “Everyone who does evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and He delights in them,” or, “Where is the God of justice?” (v. 17)
Here we see the depth of denial. The men had rationalized “putting away” their wives as an acceptable practice and then expected God to overlook the offenses they had committed against them.
So it was not divorce that God hated, but the heartlessness of men putting away their wives without any justifiable reason and without a writ of divorce as required under the Law before sending them away. Sadly, “put away” women were known as “agunah,” which means “chained woman,” since there were still legally bound to their husbands, and therefore, they were not free to marry. It was a cruel practice indeed.
Is Divorce a Sin?
“Then the LORD said to me in the days of Josiah the king, “Have you seen what faithless Israel did? She went up on every high hill and under every green tree, and she was a harlot there. I thought, ‘After she has done all these things she will return to Me’; but she did not return, and her treacherous sister Judah saw it. And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce, yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also.” Jeremiah 3:6-8
Is there any time in Scripture where God sins? Of course not. God cannot sin. Yet God divorced Israel; therefore divorce may be a righteous response to a spouse’s profound or otherwise habitual moral failure.
For here God Himself acknowledges His bitter disappointment in the faithlessness of His wayward bride and uses the Mosaic Law as His model to impose just discipline for His people’s collective failure to honor their covenant with Him.
The Lord of Heaven cites His just cause, pronounces that He has issued a writ of divorce and sends away His beloved as a consequence of her unfaithful heart and despicable ways. Theirs was a profound and ongoing spiritual betrayal, a turning away from the One who had so richly blessed them. But He could no longer accommodate His people’s treachery.
Divorce is only a sin when the motives are self-serving, which Jesus makes glaringly apparent, as we will see in His pointed exchanges with the Pharisees.
Does Remarriage Constitute Adultery?
She was perhaps the most despondent woman I have ever met.
I was invited to an abuse survivor’s home to meet with several of her friends who were either victims or survivors. After introducing myself, the women took turns sharing some of their experiences. The woman sitting next to me finally opened up, and what she had to share was painfully shocking.
She said that her husband had divorced her in order to marry the woman with whom he had been having an affair. That was devastating enough. But then she shared that the pastor at the church where she attended insisted that she was still bound to her husband. She was told that she had no right to marry again but, according to Jesus’ teachings, she could only wait and pray that her former husband might divorce the woman to whom he was married and remarry her.
The poor thing looked like she had been kicked in the gut and, spiritually speaking, she had been. Tears began to well up in her eyes. What I saw in her face exuded pure hopelessness, put there by a pastor who did not understand the heart of God.
After sharing her account, she turned to me and said timidly, “What do you think God wants of me?” And I reached over and gently touched her arm, and the words just naturally flowed out, “I think He wants you to be free.” It was then that I saw the smallest flicker of acknowledgement and hope in her face.
I wish I had known then what I know now. I have no idea what happened to that poor, tortured daughter of God, but she had been wronged not just by her husband, but by her pastor, if only in ignorance.
What she was taught is wholly consistent with what many churches teach, but it is inconsistent with what we see in the Law, and it is not reflected in the teachings of Jesus.
If it is true that marrying after divorce is always a sin, then Jesus contradicted the Mosaic Law, and that tortured woman’s plight would serve as the standard for those of us who have been divorced. To ignore or diminish that teaching would mean there are countless numbers of perpetual sinners finding refuge in the contemporary church, and no one seems to care.
So this too is an issue that needs to be thoroughly analyzed once again with an eye toward language, culture and the heart of God. Under church teachings, those of us who have divorced would all be in lifelong limbo and bound to the one we originally married with no other option unless our former spouse dies.
But that too doesn’t quite seem right, does it? It shouldn’t, because it isn’t.
Now, some teach that, as long as we remarried people realize we have sinned, then we can confess and ask forgiveness and be forgiven. But that is shockingly illogical, as God never condones perpetual sin. We cannot have it both ways.
The truth is that Jesus never revised nor rejected the Mosaic Law as it related to lawful divorce. The controversies He discussed always related to the act of “putting away,” not divorce for legitimate cause with the required provision of a writ, nor did He contest the freedom to marry once lawfully divorced.
Applying this newfound understanding, let’s examine Jesus’ words on related issues as recorded in Matthew 5 and 19 and Mark 10. I’ll begin with the New American Standard to see what we have been taught and then contrast it with a literal translation.
It becomes quickly evident that the act of putting away a wife without cause or a writ was just as entrenched – and just as offensive – in Jesus’ day as it was in Malachi’s, and our Lord’s condemnation is similarly severe.
Beginning in Matthew 5, in several different instances, Jesus says, “You have been told,” or “You have been taught…” He is acknowledging things that were commonly taught, but then He corrects or clarifies God’s heart in relation to those teachings.
Earlier in the chapter, Jesus says…
“You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder,’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell. Matthew 5: 21-23[1]
Meaning: You may think that verbal cruelty is acceptable as long as you don’t cause physical harm, but verbal abuse is tantamount to heart murder, and God sees your heart. Jesus’ teaching here should serve as profound insight in terms of how God sees verbal and emotional abuse.
Jesus continues…
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Matthew 5:27-28
Meaning: Just because you haven’t technically committed adultery doesn’t mean you haven’t done so in your heart, and God sees your heart.
(If this is the case, then perhaps all women could divorce their husbands for adultery, yet I have never heard that taught…)
Then Jesus condemns the notion of “putting away” (not divorcing) a wife with one exception, saying:
“It was said, ‘Whoever sends away his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce’ but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” Matthew 5: 31-32 (New American Standard)
It is easy to see how this Scripture could be construed to teach that anyone who divorces and remarries commits adultery. But take a closer look at what is being said.
In the Greek, the term for divorce is “apostasion,” and the term for “putting away” is “apoluo.”
The literal translation reads:
“And it was said, that whoever may put away [apoluo] his wife, let him give to her a writing of divorce [apostasion]; but I – I say to you, that whoever may put away [apoluo] his wife, save for the matter of unchastity [porneia], doth make her to commit adultery [moichao]; and whoever may marry her who hath been put away [apoluo] doth commit adultery. [moichao]” Matthew 5: 31-32 (Young’s Literal Translation)
Jesus is highlighting the fact that men knew the Law, yet they were justifying releasing their wives without cause and/or without a writ. “Just because you have been told that you may put away your wife as long as you give her a writ of divorce does not make it right if there is no justification for it. God sees your heart.”
Then He continues “…whoever may put away [apoluo] his wife, save for the matter of whoredom [porneia], doth make her to commit adultery; and whoever may marry her who hath been put away [apoluo] doth commit adultery.”
Jesus uses two very different terms in the same sentence – one is the term for adultery, and the other is the term for “fornication” or more literally “unchastity,” which He explains as the only cause for putting away a wife. The term references sexual immorality which, in marriage, would constitute adultery, but that is not the term used here. If Jesus intended to say “adultery,” He would have.
“Unchastity” references sexual involvement prior to marriage, just as we see in the case of Joseph and Jesus’ mother, Mary, when Joseph sought to put her away when she was found to be pregnant with Jesus.
To verify the meaning of this term, let’s look at Jesus’ confrontation with the Pharisees, where they infer that He is an illegitimate son, a bastard born of “fornication” [porneia].
In John 8:19, the Pharisees make reference to Jesus’ seemingly soiled reputation sarcastically asking Jesus, “Where is your father?”
They endeavor to emphasize His shameful history with their assertion in v. 41, saying: “We are not illegitimate children and born out of fornication [porneia]; we have one Father, even God.” (Amplified, emphasis added)
This is the same term Jesus used in Matthew 5 when He references the only cause for putting away a wife – a term that doesn’t reference sex outside of marriage, but sex prior to marriage. Although a betrothed woman was considered a wife, Jesus acknowledged that putting her away without a writ as a result of a sexual offense was understood to be acceptable as the marital vows had not been taken, and the “ketubah” had not taken effect.
We also see this identical term when the Apostle Paul references the appropriateness of men taking a wife to avoid “immoralities” [porneia – premarital sex] in I Corinthians 7:1. The issue was not that they were at-risk of extramarital sex, but premarital sex.
Returning to Matthew 5, see how our Lord declares that the man who put away his wife without a writ was responsible for her adultery.
“…I say to you that everyone who puts away his wife… makes her commit adultery…” (emphasis added) Matthew 5:32
How is that?
Without any financial support as required under the “ketubah,” put-away women had few options and may have been compelled to accept a husband simply to survive in spite of their still-married status – committing adultery. Jesus laid the responsibility for that offense at the feet of their heartless husbands.
In Mark 10:11-12, Jesus elaborates: “And He said to them, “Whoever puts away his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces (separates from) her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.”
Here our Lord made it clear that the man who put away his wife and took another was committing adultery. This was something new, for men had come to believe that only the wife required a writ to be free to marry, yet Jesus holds them accountable, insisting that the failure to lawfully divorce meant they were also still bound in marriage until their moral and legal obligations before God had been met.
Also, it is important to note that women had no authority to divorce their husbands; divorce had to be effected by husbands alone. It merits mentioning that wives could petition the priests for a divorce for cause and, if appropriate, the priests could extract a writ from a husband, even under duress. So when Jesus says that should a wife put away [apoluo] her husband, the term must mean “separate from,” for she had no authority to effect a divorce. By separating from her husband and taking another husband, she committed adultery, because she was still married.
Similarly, in Matthew 5:32 we see that the man who married a put-away wife also committed adultery, because she was still another man’s wife.
So Jesus makes it clear that the man who put away his wife, the put-away wife and the man who married her all committed adultery, because she and her original husband were still married!
Now let’s move on to Jesus’ teaching in Mark 10. Young’s Literal Translation reads:
“And the Pharisees, having come near, questioned him, if it is lawful for a husband to put away [apoluo] a wife, tempting him, and he answering said to them, ‘What did Moses command you?’ and they said, ‘Moses suffered to write a bill of divorce [apostasion], and to put away [apoluo].’ And Jesus answering said to them, ‘For the stiffness of your heart he wrote you this command, but from the beginning of the creation, a male and a female God did make them; on this account shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be—the two—for one flesh; so that they are no more two, but one flesh…” Mark 10:2-9 (emphasis added)
Let’s begin with the agenda. The Pharisees came to test Jesus. There was no sincere desire to understand the heart of God, but rather a design to see if our Lord would sign off on their self-serving, ungodly practice of sending away their wives to take other wives.
So Jesus tosses it back in their lap, asking them what Moses had instructed.
They replied referencing Deuteronomy 24, saying essentially, “The Law says that as long as we give our wives a writ of divorce we can send them away.” They thought they had found the legal loophole that let them off the hook. While they quoted two aspects of the Law, the first requirement is shockingly absent – cause. They didn’t seem to think cause was an issue as long as a writ was provided. And just because they knew a writ was required under the Law did not necessarily mean they were honoring it.
Jesus comes right back at them. “The provision allowing divorce was provided because of the hardness of your hearts.” (emphasis added)
Even technically abiding by the Law was still wrong if their hearts were wrong. Jesus’ turns their sense of entitlement into an indictment of their character and exposes their design to exploit the Law for their own selfish purposes. Marriage was designed to be a lifelong union of a man and his wife who become one. The Law was not put there to provide them with an easy “out,” but to ensure that wives were not cast aside without cause, provision or the right to marry. Jesus infers that the Law was designed to protect women from hard-hearted men.
Our Lord made it wondrously clear that He was passionate about the foundation of marriage, which should never be viewed in such shallow, self-serving terms. Jesus cements God’s original intent for marriage by saying, “What God has joined together, let no man tear asunder.”
Yet here we see another common misinterpretation. While many have asserted that “tearing asunder” is a reference to divorce, that is incorrect. The act of tearing asunder doesn’t reference the act of divorce, but rather those actions and behaviors that ultimately destroy the marital bond and make divorce necessary! Jesus cautions that “no man” should be responsible for tearing apart that one-flesh bond, whether from within or outside of the marriage relationship. That kind of tearing shouldn’t happen, but it does.
In truth, divorce is merely a legal acknowledgement of a tragic spiritual reality.
What About Abuse?
The common teaching that divorce is only allowed for adultery or abandonment must by necessity accept that abuse of any kind does not constitute sufficient cause for divorce, and abuse victims are therefore obligated to remain in such cruel relationships “in obedience to Christ.” Some even teach that, for those who die at the hands of their abusers, God is glorified by their faithfulness.
Many in abusive marriages are led to believe they will be abandoned by God if they divorce their abusers. Such teachings empower abusers who will gladly insist that, without proof of adultery, their victims must remain.
Does this reflect the heart of God to you? It shouldn’t, because it doesn’t.
Some pastors and teachers try to tip-toe around this on the basis that perhaps abuse is a form of abandonment, or that abuse victims may separate from their abusers, but not divorce. There are also some who teach that physical and sexual abuse may constitute cause (although, from a purely legalistic viewpoint, there is no scriptural support for that). However, emotional, verbal, spiritual and/or financial abuse would not constitute cause. Regardless, according to the traditional church script, abuse victims who choose to divorce their abusers should expect to be abandoned by God because God hates divorce outside of the prescribed norms, and would also commit adultery should they remarry.
Ultimately, we cannot have it both ways: either divorce is only justified for adultery and abandonment or we have misinterpreted and misappropriated the truth of God who recognizes “cause” as anything which overtly denigrates His covenant call to love, honor and cherish one another in marriage.
Here it must be acknowledged that there are wolves in sheep’s clothing who find ways to permeate the body of Christ who know how to win the hearts of believers (mostly women) and exploit their faith for self-serving purposes. Christian women make ideal abuser targets…
One woman shared that her husband was a caring, charming man who had all the marks of a believer while they were dating and throughout their engagement. After their picture-perfect wedding, as they drove to their honeymoon destination, her newlywed husband reached over and put his hand on her leg and said, “You’re mine now.” She closed her message with the chilling words, “The abuse began on our wedding night.”
The imposter was a wicked man who knew exactly what he was doing. She should have been taught prior to their wedding that such cruelty was unacceptable. Then she should have been protected from that man and removed from that home upon her disclosure, and encouraged to divorce him at the earliest opportunity and given the opportunity to grieve and heal. Sadly, there are many more just like that man among us.
But, we don’t have to look too far to see that, by definition, a true believer cannot simultaneously be an abuser:
“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers [verbal abusers], nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God?” I Cor. 6:9
The Book of Jude (and others) also clearly describes the wicked pretenders among us whom we should be willing to identify as such:
“For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ… These are the men who are hidden reefs in your love feasts when they feast with you without fear, caring for themselves; clouds without water, carried along by winds; autumn trees without fruit, doubly dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up their own shame like foam; wandering stars, for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever.” Jude 4, 12-13
May those of us who know Jesus refuse to accommodate wickedness in our marriages and our homes. Nor should we be pressured to remain in mockery marriages to protect the church’s image, although this seems to be a common guilt message/incorrect motivation, as well.
Does Divorce Destroy Marriages – And Make the Church Look Bad?
Perhaps the painful reality is that the divorce rate within the body of Christ is a reflection of the truth – that there are wicked people destroying homes and families from within. Abusers should be exposed and their victims should be encouraged to identify the truth and keep themselves and their children safe from physical, emotional and spiritual harm – and in defense of godly homes and marriages.
Keeping people in cruel marriages doesn’t make them less cruel, and it should be understood that wicked people should expect to reap what they have sown. If anything, rather than breaking the cycle, keeping people in mockery marriages only perpetuates dysfunction in future generations while alienating many from God and a potential life of genuine faith.
In closing:
Ultimately, biblical divorce is a lawful, appropriate response to the tearing apart of the marriage, a vehicle that provides recourse for the one who has been neglected, abused or emotionally or physically abandoned with a design to facilitate the possibility of genuine relationship in the future. Marriage is sacred in every aspect and should be viewed and respected as such. It is overt human failure that desecrates that which is sacred not merely in status but in substance.
As I shared, even though there were countless times I felt the Spirit prompting me to leave, not one Christian friend, counselor or pastor ever told me that what I was living in was abusive and unacceptable or that I had any options. On the contrary, the focus was always on what I should have been doing differently or needed to do to “save the marriage.” As a result, I sacrificed 20 years of my life to a wicked man, and I have had to grieve and recover from severe emotional trauma coupled with overwhelming guilt and regret for what I put my own children through as a result of trusting others’ voices above the Lord’s for far too long.
Did I have “cause” to divorce my abuser? Absolutely. “Love, honor and cherish” does not leave room for “abuse, demean and control.”[2] I cannot fathom why that is so difficult for pastors, teachers and Christian counselors to understand.
Not only that, but several years after my divorce, the Lord brought me and my new husband together (which is a whole other testimony to God’s grace and goodness), we married 14 years ago, and we have seen Him validate and bless our marriage and our ministry beyond measure. I don’t know why would He do that if we are sinning.
And just so you know, I am not a divorced woman, I am a married woman. I cannot find the words “divorced” or “remarried” as adjectives in Scripture.
If you have taken the time to read this, I want to extend a hearty “thank you” for your time as well as your desire to understand the heart of God and convey His life-giving truth to the hurting.
Sincerely,
Cindy Burrell, Owner/Author
Hurtbylove.com
[2] See “Understanding the Marriage Covenant”
See “God Is My Witness: Making a Case for Biblical Divorce”
Copyright 2020, All Rights Reserved
Cindy Burrell/Hurtbylove.com
Sometimes it feels as though I have lived two profoundly different lifetimes.
Many years ago, I lived as one unloved, unseen and unappreciated, fearful and confused, trying to please someone who would not be pleased. Loneliness hung heavy over me. The wounds were deep, and the pain was crippling.
But, the day came when God set me free, and He began to whisper to me, reminding me of who I am – and whose I am. The truth is that He had been trying to speak to me for a long time, but I wasn’t listening. My pride was in the way.
I finally left that ungodly life behind. It was not an easy journey to find freedom and peace, but it was well worth the effort. And in time a new life with a new love began. Rather than feeling inadequate or fearful, I am adored and appreciated. I am not viewed as a pest, but as a priority. My husband is my protector, my provider, and my best friend.
I remember well that old, dark life, but now it feels like another lifetime.
It was.
If you sense God calling you out of the darkness and into His marvelous light, listen. It may be that He has a whole new life out there waiting for you, too.
“…hope in the Lord; for with the Lord there is lovingkindness, and with Him is abundant redemption.” Psalm 130:7
“But I still love him.”
Maybe you have said those words at one time or another. Even in the midst of the craziness, you have chosen to set aside your pain, wipe your tears and fervently proclaim in spite of everything he has said and done, “But I still love him.”
The words seem to stand alone, however “but” is a conjunction that connects and contrasts the first part of a sentence with the second. With this in mind, let’s consider what a complete sentence might sound like.
“He is controlling, mean and unpredictable… but I still love him.”
“He blames me for everything… but I still love him.”
“I feel lost, lonely and confused… but I still love him.”
“But I still love him…” They are words that connect real pain with patient optimism – generous measures of hope, devotion, determination and – let’s be honest – at least a small measure of denial.
If you were to set aside every excuse and rationale and be completely honest, how would you describe the man with whom you are sharing your life? Is he approachable, accepting and affectionate, kind, gracious and generous? Is he intrinsically safe? Or does he tend to be selfish, quick-tempered, controlling, manipulative and demanding?
The next question is: Do you love the man he is, or do you love the man you fell in love with – the man you believe he could be?
Every victim whom I have ever asked that question has solemnly confessed that she loves the man she fell in love with, a man who seems to have mysteriously vanished and been replaced by a man she barely recognizes. Some who are willing to concede that he is failing as a husband at the moment prefer to hold to a more generous and optimistic perspective by adding, “But, he can also be charming and funny and affectionate. Sometimes I see that side of him, and that is the man I love.”
I understand completely. It is that occasional sighting of Dr. Jekyll* that convinces you that you can surely find a way to put up with Mr. Hyde until the good man you infrequently catch a glimpse of returns once and for all. Some women have held tightly to that hope for 30 or 40 years or more to finally discover that the man they loved lived only in their imagination. So I simply pray that God will help you discern the kind of man he really is one way or the other.
Dear reader, this is your life and your dilemma, and my desire is to simply to give you permission to be honest with yourself. I know it’s scary, because the truth may not be easy to accept or address.
Nevertheless, I will pose it to you once again: Do you love the man he is, or do you love the man you believe he could be, but isn’t?
“[Love] does not rejoice in unrighteousness but rejoices with the truth.” I Cor. 13:6
* The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson, (1886)
Copyright 2019, All Rights Reserved
Cindy Burrell/Hurtbylove.com
I was meeting up with my then-estranged husband at a local book store to transfer our son, Kyle, into his care so the two of them could spend the day together. Meandering through the aisles while awaiting his arrival, the man suddenly approached me with a basket of chocolate-covered strawberries in one hand and a big smile on his face.
Rather than feeling touched in any way, I felt kind of sick, but not knowing how to respond in the moment, I simply accepted the berries with gratitude. The man then tried to enter into small talk with me and ended by asking me if I would like to go out for lunch or coffee sometime. “No,” came the easy response, in spite of the gift I held in my hands and the fact that our son was observing the entire exchange. After a couple more awkward minutes, the man and our eldest son finally headed out the door.
That evening, my then-husband called again and tried to talk me into spending time with him. Not a chance. After calmly shutting him down from every angle, I closed with, “But thank you for the strawberries.”
“Whatever,” came his sarcastic reply, and immediately I thought to myself, “There it is.” I knew those blasted berries came with strings attached – some kind of obligation that I refused to accommodate. His plan had failed.
Since those days, I have heard and read similar stories and have known that this type of scenario represents a typical abuser strategy, but I didn’t know it had a name: Selfish giving.*
Selfish giving has the appearance of selflessness, generosity or genuine care, but when you’re in an abusive relationship, it is almost exclusively another form of self-serving manipulation. Selfish giving imposes an awkward pressure on the abuser’s victim to convey appreciation and – he hopes – an obligation to forgive any and all previous offenses and re-establish some degree of intimacy based on the perception of good will.
Selfish giving is simply another form of crazy-making designed to force you to let your guard down. Any failure to respond according to the abuser’s anticipated expectations gives him ammunition to paint you as selfish, unfeeling and ungrateful.
Unfortunately, gifts are the abuser’s cheap, easy substitute for legitimate repentance and change. But note…
On the other hand, the unrepentant abuser believes a heart-warming gift will give the impression of genuine devotion and inspire renewed trust. The abuser’s motives do not reflect genuine goodness but rather pure, unadulterated selfishness.
So know that you don’t have to participate in his game.
I know it may feel strange to refuse his gifts, offers of help or other seemingly selfless gestures, but when you do, you are refusing to give him access to your life or your heart and depriving him of the power he seeks. You are setting an important boundary and letting him know that you will not risk jeopardizing your safety, peace and contentment for anyone – or anything.
“Thorns and snares are in the way of the crooked; whoever guards his soul will keep far from them.” Proverbs 22:5
###
For more on this subject, you might want to check out “Lessons In Crazy-Making.”
*The dynamic was referenced by a commenter on another blog.
Abusers may be of either gender; however, the overwhelming majority of abusers are male. For the sake of simplicity, the abuser is referenced here in the masculine. The reader’s understanding is appreciated.
Cindy Burrell/Hurtbylove.com
Copyright 2019, All Rights Reserved
