What is Marriage? - Myths of Divorce, Adultery, and Infidelity

Having examined the biological, Biblical, and cultural basis for marriage, we've applied that understanding to various alternate forms of "marriage." Read those articles first if you haven't, or this one may not make as much sense. Now, we want to turn our attention to how it applies to the breakdown of a marriage.

What I've often encountered in reading various articles on marriage, divorce, adultery, and infidelity are a lot of misconceptions, especially among Christians, about what Jesus said about it. What are the common myths about Jesus' words, and infidelity in general? The following is my list.

Divorce is a Sin

This is one of the most common ones. In actuality, most of the time, it is true, but most people don't know what divorce means. No, I'm not merely referring to the "adultery clause" divorce. I mean getting a legal divorce, in and of itself, is not sinful. Before you start throwing things at your computer, hear me out.

First, keep in mind what we've established as the basis for marriage in the first three articles. The defining basis is the biological sexual act of procreation (no matter whether the act ever does procreate). Without that union, there is no marriage, per biology, history, and Biblically.

That as a given, what act can rend that union asunder? A legal piece of paper saying you are no longer married, even though we've shown that the government cannot establish a marriage? See if you can pick up Jesus' answer to that question:

For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh: so that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. And in the house the disciples asked him again of this matter. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her: and if she herself shall put away her husband, and marry another, she committeth adultery. (Mar 10:7-12 ASV)

The disciples asked Jesus to clarify what He was talking about concerning divorce and the conditions when a marriage is "put asunder". Note Jesus list two conditions: putting away and marrying another. By so doing, a person commits the sin of adultery save when adultery has already been committed, that is, the marriage has already been torn apart.

More to the point, the matter of divorcing legally does not tear a marriage apart by itself anymore than a legal marriage certificate marries a person. Rather, the real destruction of the marital bonds occurs when a new marital relationship is established with someone else. That is, when a person has sex with someone other than their spouse, they are marrying that person and divorcing their spouse.

Merely getting a legal divorce does not commit sin. If a person never marries another through sex, they never in reality divorce their spouse. Rather, it is a mere separation and not sinful unless you have sex with another before your spouse does.

One Commits Adultery Only When They are Legally Married

Not true. The first person you have sex with in your life becomes your spouse. The next person you have sex with, you divorce your first spouse and marry your second, and so on down the list, however long it may be. As we've seen, it is having sex that is the basis for marriage, even if not the fullness.

"Premarital" sex is an oxymoron since it is sex that marries two people together. It is impossible to "sow your wild oats" before marriage, for planting them is the same as marrying someone. There are only two situations when having sex is not adultery, according to Jesus. The first time you have sex and having sex with a new person after your spouse has committed adultery on you. Other than that, if you are not having sex with your spouse, you are committing adultery. Premarital sex is nothing more than getting married, divorced, and committing adultery over and over again for most people.

When Your Spouse Commits Adultery, You're Biblically Required to Divorce Him

Jesus never said that. What He said is the only time divorcing and remarrying is not committing the sin of adultery is when your spouse has already committed adultery. In truth, Jesus' ideal is that a couple doesn't get torn asunder in the first place. When it does happen, a lot of circumstances go into a decision to rebuild or divorce. However, there is no Biblical requirement to do so upon discovering your spouse has committed adultery.

Jesus Said You Can't Divorce Except for Adultery

This is another very common one. Strictly speaking, divorce alone isn't the issue, but divorce in order to marry another. But what did Jesus really say?

And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. But Jesus said unto them, For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. (Mar 10:4-5 ASV)

Note: Though due to our "hardness of heart" it was permitted, but that is not the design specifications as God created marriage. Rather, "and the two shall become one flesh: so that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." (Mar 10:8-9 ASV)

The design specs is that a man and a woman will join together and that union will never be nullified for a lifetime. Strictly speaking, one would never remarry, even if divorced, even if doing so would not commit adultery. Because God's design specs is one spouse, period. But due to the fall, He allows us to divorce and remarry.

Jesus never said you can't get a divorce. Only that getting a divorce and remarrying is a result of the fall, not how God designed it to work. What He did say is that you cannot divorce and remarry without committing the sin of adultery unless your spouse beats you to the sin first. Whether or not you are committing the sin of adultery by divorcing and remarrying is the point Jesus was making. Unfortunately, there is still plenty of hardness of heart to go around. Jesus stops short of taking the option off the table.

Cheating and Adultery Are the Same Thing

Though they frequently go together, they are not the same thing. Cheating, infidelity, or having an affair involve two main components: emotional and/or physical sharing of martial intimacy outside the marriage, and deception with one's spouse. Adultery is when a person commits or strongly wants to commit the act of sexual intercourse with a person other than one's spouse.

A person who divorces and remarries may commit adultery as Jesus explained, but he is not deceptively cheating on his spouse. No affair is involved. Likewise, a person may be involved in an emotional affair without their spouse's knowledge, but successfully avoid sexual intercourse or the desire to do so and therefore not commit adultery.

Therefore, discovering your spouse is cheating on you, if he's not had sexual intercourse with her or desired to do so, he's not committed adultery and hasn't torn asunder the marital bond. There's some other heavy sins and breaches of trust involved, but there would be no "get out of marriage free" card to avoid committing adultery yourself if you were to divorce and remarry him.

Conclusion

Adultery is the act of rending asunder your marriage to your spouse by uniting sexually with another, in effect marrying them instead. This is also the definition of divorce in order to marry another. Only when your marriage has already been rent asunder by your spouse do you avoid the sin of adultery to do the same thing—before you reunite to them, in effect remarrying them.

This process happens no matter the legal marital status, presence of a ceremony, or promises made or not made, since sexual union is the foundation of what it means to be married. Not recognizing this and failing to treat it as a real marriage is the basis upon which what we've erroneously termed "premarital sex" or "sowing one's wild oats" is sinful. There is no such thing as sex before marriage, because sex establishes the marital bond. It is the lack of commitments of a marriage with it that make it sinful. Ironically, many people in our society when they first "officially get married" commit adultery in doing so.

It is this reality which leads to so much infidelity and divorce. What can we expect when our society conveys to teens, "have sex as much as you want now, because eventually you'll be 'tied down' to one woman when you get married." Teens ask why premarital sex is wrong when it seems like a purely recreational activity you do with someone you love, not much different than going to a movie together, or sharing ice cream?

Then, suddenly when they get a marriage certificate and say, "I do," sex now means something more? That all those years of playing the field will come to a screeching halt and they'll be faithful to one person? That what before was a recreational activity will no longer be seen as such or treated that way? How dumb are we to expect anything different than the high rates of divorce and infidelity in our society when we've failed to learn ourselves and teach to our children the biological and Biblical basis for marriage: sex consummates and seals that union. It is not merely a recreational activity that two people who might love one another do. Especially in God's eyes.

The reality is that a huge majority who read this blog fall into this category. I recall a woman's surprise when she learned, while I was at college, that I'd never had sex with anyone. For her, at least, I was the first male virgin she'd ever met. Sure made me feel like I was in a small minority.

Often, due to the hardness of a spouse's heart either in sin, abuse, or a combination thereof, divorce is either unavoidable or the least of all sins. While not God's ideal, remarriage avoids some worse sins. We live in a fallen world, and sometimes we're left with fallen solutions.

So what if you're in one of these groups? The good news is that while there is sin, while you've harmed yourself and perhaps others, while you've not lived up to God's ideal, there is healing for both yourself and your relationships. My final article will take a look at healing a marital relationship broken by these disruptive activities to what God has joined together.

What is Marriage? - Biblical Basis

So far we have examined the biological basis of marriage. We'll address the Biblical basis next, and then the cultural basis as the Biblical will provide an information base for the cultural aspects.

Is this important for non-Christians to understand? Yes. Because if one does not understand these basic points, one will tend to respond to straw men arguments instead of the true Biblical model. Also, a lack of understanding here will fail to see how well the Biblical basis blends with the biological one discussed last time.

Unfortunately many of the straw men have been promoted by Christians themselves, so one can hardly fault non-Christians for arguing against them. Some of them I would argue against as well. So it is most critical that Christians reexamine what marriage is based upon Biblical principles rather than from pop theology.

To that end, we will look first at God's design, then the theological design, and end with some conclusions.

God's Design for Marriage

The most complete snapshot of God's intentions in creating marriage, and what it is, is from the words of Jesus Christ Himself.

And there came unto him Pharisees, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? trying him. And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. But Jesus said unto them, For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of the creation, Male and female made he them. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh: so that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. (Mar 10:2-9 ASV)

Jesus takes this opportunity to quote Genesis 2:24. The two shall become one flesh. Note this refers to "flesh." This is a physical union. So much so that Jesus says they are no longer "two, but one flesh." This reflects two main truths about this marital union, that is, the basis for marriage from the Biblical perspective.

Sexual intercourse unites a man and woman into one flesh. This is at the heart of marriage. Jesus makes this clear in the next verses following the above:

And in the house the disciples asked him again of this matter. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her: and if she herself shall put away her husband, and marry another, she committeth adultery. (Mar 10:10-12 ASV)

We'll get to the issues of divorce and adultery later. For now, Jesus is clarifying for His disciples about his comments to the people quoted earlier. For He said, "What God has joined together, let not man put asunder." How is that done? Certainly not by a piece of paper.

Instead, Jesus shows that the way such a union is broken asunder is by committing adultery: to have sexual intercourse with someone other than one's spouse. His whole argument with the Pharisees is based on the fact that when a physical union is sealed through sex, it is "torn asunder" when adultery, having sex with another, is committed.

St. Paul also has this in mind when he said, "Or know ye not that he that is joined to a harlot is one body? for, The twain, saith he, shall become one flesh." (1Co 6:16 ASV)

Clearly, from a Biblical standpoint, and from God's perspective, sexual intercourse joins two people into one flesh—no matter how serious the two people take it. Not needed is a legal certificate saying you're married. It is not needed that you live together. It is not needed that anyone thinks or believes you are united in marriage, even the couple themselves. Even a marriage ceremony is not needed. By the act of sexual intercourse, from God's perspective, the two are joined into one. Even if it is merely a harlot you pay to have a one-night stand with.

This is why premarital sex is an oxymoron. There is no such animal. When you have sex, you are marrying that person. Sex is a marital forming act. As we noted in the biological basis, one can live together, share expenses, be the most intimate of friends, but without that sexual union, it is simply good friends living together. Sexual union forms the basis of joining the two into one, and therefore the core beginning of a family.

And therefore, according to Jesus, when you have sex with another person after joining to a spouse, you are tearing asunder that bond created with the first, save if the other spouse has committed adultery before you. Standing before a minister, many think they are getting married for the first time. Yet if they have "sown their wild oats" before that ceremony, they are deceived. They've already been married and committed adultery with as many people as they have had sex with.

It is clear from Jesus' words that God's design was for us to join with one person, and not tear that asunder by uniting to another. But due to our fallen condition, our hardness of heart, deviation from the ideal is treated in an attempt to provide healing.

Creating one flesh is fulfilled literally in the offspring of sexual acts. As we noted in the biological basis, it is the potential creation of children inherent in the act of sexual union that provides for the uniting factor. What more literal fulfillment of the two becoming one is there than in the children produced from that sexual union? Both husband and wife's DNA, united into a new person. The child is literally the one flesh of the two.

Without this potential reality, sex would not be uniting. It is the mingling of the two's seed that at the same time provides for the possibility of children, and the two becoming one flesh through the act designed to give birth to new life. Without that fact, sex would only be one more way among many options to have a good time.

Jesus, with these words, links the biological design of God with God's design and purpose. The two are fully synced into one reality. Participating in sexual intercourse with someone is tantamount to saying to them, "I want to have your children and create a family with you." Because that is the purpose of doing that act. The potential is always there each time sexual union happens, no matter the reason the couple is doing it.

I know, there is the pill, and abortion. Since the 1960s, people have had the option to get rid of the purpose of sex: children. If the pill or other modes of contraception don't prevent a pregnancy, there is always the option to kill the child before it can escape the womb. Be that as it may, it doesn't change the nature of the act to make it non-uniting. The fact is, whether a person ever has a child or not, the act unites the two into one flesh simply because that is what the act is designed to do biologically as God created it.

One union, not torn asunder. That is God's design for marriage. Have we violated that ideal? If statistics are anywhere close, a clear majority of the readers of this blog have not followed that prescription, for whatever reason. This does not mean it is the end of the world. There is healing and forgiveness. But it is oh, so easy to take the fallen state and want to make that "normal" because we'd rather not face our guilt than acknowledge it and deal with it openly.

God's Theological Intent for Marriage

St. Paul makes it clear that our marriage is an image of our union with God.

For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is great: but I speak in regard of Christ and of the church. (Eph 5:31-32 ASV)

Prior to these verses, St. Paul speaks of how husbands and wives should show love for one another, and each one is related to Christ and His bride, the Church, the Body of Christ. St. Paul says, "for no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the church; because we are members of his body." (Eph 5:29-30 ASV)

As one body, we are united to Christ in baptism. (Romans 6:5) And that bride is to be presented to Christ in the next life. (Revelations 19:7) What we have now in human marriage is a shadow of that union. As Jesus prayed, we'd become one with Him. (John 17:21-23) Therefore our union with each other in marriage is an image of our union with God.

As such, it is meant to reflect that ideal. What image does sexual union with more than one person create? Multiple gods? Switching from one god to another? Likewise, what picture does uniting with multiple people for the sole purpose of having a good time paint? Union to God isn't to be taken seriously? Is for our own selfish fulfillment? Everything centers around us and not Him?

This is why St. Paul instructs Timothy and Titus that a bishop and deacon should only be from those who only had one wife. (1 Timothy 3:2, 12, Titus 1:6) Even for the office of widow, among other criteria, they had to be the wife of one husband. (1 Timothy 5:9) Because those ministering as the hands and feet of Christ among the people should reflect a proper theological marriage to God through their earthly marriage. They had to conform to God's design specs in order to represent Him in an official capacity.

Is divorce allowed? Is remarriage allowed after divorce? After the death of a spouse? Yes. According to Christ, due to our hardness of heart, our fallen condition, the ideal design specs that Christ presents is often not achieved and allowance is made.

But it is still the design specs Christ gives as the Christian understanding of marriage. Sexual union unites us into one flesh with another. Sexual union with another causes us to commit adultery with the first, and so on down the line, save when adultery has already been committed by the other spouse. Or by the death of a spouse, in St. Paul's opinion, though he encourages them to not remarry. (1 Corinthians 7:39)

We will examine divorce and adultery in more detail later. Here we note this indicates God's original design spec is "a man and a woman" joined in marriage for life through the action of creating children, whether or not any children are ever brought forth. In this, the biological basis for marriage that syncs with the Biblical basis for marriage. God considers such a union, a marriage, and not to be torn asunder by sexual union with another.

Next time we'll examine the cultural basis for marriage.

Did OT Morality Get Thrown Under the Bus?

One of the methods used to discount sections of the Bible that may go against what one wants to believe is to illustrate how we no longer abide by many of the commandments in the Old Testament. The implication being, of course, if we don't have to avoid eating pigs or sacrifice sheep upon an altar anymore, then who's to say prohibitions against homosexual relationships or premarital sex haven't also gone the way of the dinosaur? Or that sex outside of marriage is no longer wrong?

There is some truth to the viewpoint. That is, there are commandments in the Old Testament that we no longer follow. There were some changes made along the way. Some would attribute them to cultural differences, but we must not assume too quickly this is the case. Especially when the reason for those changes are spelled out in the Bible itself.

Therein lies the problem. People point to changes and then assume that means everything is up in the air and available for redefining in the manner we want to define, so as to allow for our favorite sin. When we become the arbitrators of which commandments to keep and which commandments to dump, then we have invalidated the authority of Scripture to be any kind of reliable guide and moral compass. Indeed, that appears to be the goal of many groups, to relegate Scriptures out of the realm of moral teaching and restrict it to purely "spiritual" applications.

However, the spiritual cannot be artificially separated from the rest of life. If God intended anything, it was to have us live a way of life that promotes physical, emotional, moral, social, and spiritual health. The whole person. The commandments were not given just to have rules, but to guide us into living within our design specs so that we will find the greatest fulfillment.

The answer to the changes is in the Scriptures itself, and falls under two main categories: fulfillment and clarification. All changes and subsequent leaving behind certain commandments are due to one or a combination of both reasons. Let's take a look at some examples to illustrate what we are talking about.

The sacrificial system. This is an example of Jesus fulfilling the sacrificial system of the Old Testament. There is ample scriptures supporting that because of Jesus' sacrifice, there was no longer a need for the image of animal sacrifices which pointed to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Jesus fulfilled that section of the Law, wiping out pages of commandments that no longer apply to us. Once the real sacrifice had been made, there was no longer any need for the blood of goats and rams.

Stoning of adulterers. The Old Testament Law said that those caught in the act of adultery must be stoned. There were similar seemingly harsh laws in response to sin. This is another example of fulfillment. What Jesus did on the cross and through His resurrection was to bring a new healing to each person that up until then did not exist. Death reigned, but Christ defeated death by death and by rising to life again.

A medical example helps here. Let's say a certain infection has no cure, so when a limb gets infected, the only way to save the person is to cut off the limb. It is drastic, it is harsh, but better than the whole body being destroyed. But then one day, someone discovers a cure for this disease. Cutting off one's limb is no longer necessary, would even be considered an irresponsible and stupid decision. For why cut it off when it can be saved?

Before Christ, there was no healing for sin. Left unchecked among the people, sin acted like an infection. The only way to keep the whole of God's people from being lost was to cut off those who had become infected to the point they would infect others. To put them in quarantine, so to speak. The only solution to check sin was a radical one.

Once Christ came, however, sin had a cure. This is why the story of the woman caught in adultery is so critical to this understanding. (John 8:3-11) Most people focus on how Jesus deflected the Pharisees who were testing him. They figured if He went lenient on her, they could accuse Him of not following the law. If He was strict, they could accuse Him of not being flexible and realistic. But He told them, "He who is without sin cast the first stone." They all left, leaving Jesus alone with her.

Keep in mind, according to the law she should have been stoned. According to what Jesus said, He was the only person in the crowd, being without sin, who could cast the first stone. Being God, He would have been within His rights to follow His own law and cast the stone. But He didn't. Instead He said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more." Why the change? Because she would be healed and infect no one else with her viewpoint. Because her encounter with Christ changed her.

But this did not make adultery no longer a sin, it simply showed that because of Christ that sin could be healed. Same with many others that before required the radical cutting off of of people infected by sin. Through healing, that aspect was fulfilled and the former commandment no longer applied.

Avoiding work on the Sabbath. Numerous times the Pharisees accused Jesus of promoting work on the Sabbath, something explicitly prohibited by Law. Or at least, as the Pharisees interpreted "work," Jesus was guilty. They had huge volumes listing out what was work and what wasn't. Jesus alludes to one of them when He said, "What man is there among you who shall have one sheep, and if it should fall into a ditch on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out?" (Mat 12:11)

Jesus then concludes in the next verse, "How much more valuable then is a man than a sheep! So then it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath." By this he clarifies what was meant by "work." Indeed, He makes it plain that the Sabbath was not meant to be a burden to man, but a blessing: "The Sabbath came into being for the sake of man, and not man for the sake of the Sabbath." (Mrk 2:27)

Multiple wives. There was no commandment to have multiple wives, and nothing in the New Testament against it save when the New Testament Church wanted leaders, then the rule was a bishop or presbyter or deacon should be the husband of only one wife. (1Tim 3:2, 12, Tit 1:6) Also, for the Church to enroll a woman as a widow, she had to be the wife of only one husband. (1Tim 5:9) The later indicates what is discussed isn't one at a time, but one spouse for one's whole life. A widow by definition has no current husband, so it could only be referring to one previous husband.

This is illustrated clearly by Jesus when He is asked by the Pharisees whether it is lawful to "put away" his wife. (Mrk 10:2) Jesus asks them what Moses said, and they replied Moses permitted the giving of a certificate of divorce. Jesus then goes on to clarify not only why Moses permitted that, but also that marriage is for one man and woman, not multiple of either.

First he lays out the design of marriage as God originally intended. That is, that a man shall take a wife, and the two shall become one flesh. What God has joined, let not man put asunder. But how does one put such a union asunder. He clarifies that in the next comments.

"So He said to them, 'Whoever should put away his wife and marry another commits adultery against her. And if a wife should put away her husband and be married to another, she commits adultery.'" (Mrk 10:11-12)

Note the linkage. Divorce alone isn't the problem. It is marrying another, that is, having sexual relationships with a new person. That is committing adultery, and rends asunder the previous union when it is done. Which is why a man or woman is not sinning by marrying another when the other spouse commits adultery, because that union has already been destroyed.

Jesus clarifies for us what divorce is, when it becomes real divorce by committing adultery, and that God's design is for a man or woman to have only one spouse through their lifetime. Whether one at a time, or several at the same time, Jesus made it clear either situation was sinful, and that it was allowed in times past because of our stubbornness. Not because God wanted it that way.

In most every instance we could bring up where something was practiced or commanded in the Old Testament, but appeared to have changed, the reason could be shown to arise from one or a combination of these two factors: fulfillment and/or clarification. So to demonstrate why we should change or drop other commandments in the Old Testament, one would have to clearly show what was fulfilled or clarified to justify the change.

When it comes to the sinfulness of certain moral codes like sex outside of marriage, whether "premarital" or adultery, homosexuality, or other types, not only is there no fulfillment that would make them no longer applicable, or clarification that excuses their classification as a sin, instead one finds reinforcement of their continued sinfulness.

The Church leaders met in council to determine which of the Jewish Law the Gentile Christian converts would need to follow. They only passed on three specific parts of the Law, one of which was to abstain from "sexual immorality." (Acts 15:20) This clearly shows that the Old Testament morality about sexual matters was passed on as valid to the growing Gentile Church. Indeed, at no point in Christian history did the Church ever back off of these activities as being sin, until post-modern times among some Christian groups.

So not only do you not find any justification in Scriptures that these moral laws changed either through fulfillment or Jesus clarifying what was meant, you don't have any indication that these activities have ever been considered not sinful from Moses to this day. There is no change. There is no basis upon which to dismiss them simply because you can point to items that have changed and you want to lump these activities in with them based upon personal bias against them.

For these reasons, the obsoleteness of certain sections of the Old Testament cannot be used to justify declaring something as not sinful, or to ignore clear injunctions in the Old Testament that haven't changed nor is there any basis upon which to do so.

Can sin stop being sinful?