CLARIFICATION

Al wrote: "...for the sake of clarification, that our first exchange be a discussion of the term, or terms, which are used by the Lord to characterize 'divorce.' What are these words, what do they mean, and what does Jesus truly teach when He employs them?"

The word "divorce" is recognized, as I have stated in my previous post, as one who has been "loosed" or "set free" from their marriage. I don't make anymore of the word than simply as W.E. Vine defines the word. If anything more is asked of me on this word I'm a little unclear what it would be.

When Jesus made use of the word apoluse (1st clause of both references) in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, He stated that the one put away was released from that marriage. The "value" He placed upon the one doing the "putting away" was the committing of adultery when the "putting away one" married another. In the 2nd clause He placed a "value" upon the one who was "put away" and subsequently remarried (or married to another).

Al wrote: "This leads us back to the question, which is central to this debate: Is a divorce really a divorce? Does God not recognize certain divorces? And, if the answer to that is Yes, then which divorces does He not recognize, and why? Are those people still married?"

The answer to the question you asked is yes. A divorce is really a divorce. God recognized the divorce. This in no way means that He approves of it, but He does (or did) recognize it (He recognized a host of things without approving of it). It's not a matter of recognizing a divorce, it is a matter of God approving (or not approving) a divorce and if there is any penalty to be applied to a divorce unjustified (or unapproved of by God) and a subsequent remarriage.

Hopefully this will facilitate the discussion.

• Ron Thomas

RESPONSE

Ron states: "The word 'divorce' is recognized, as I have stated in my previous post, as one who has been 'loosed' or 'set free' from their marriage." He goes on to observe: "When Jesus made use of the word apoluse .... in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, He stated that the one put away was released from that marriage."

I truly appreciate this acknowledgment from Ron. I am in complete agreement with him on this matter. One thing he did not point out above, but with which I'm certain he would agree, is that the person "putting away" his/her spouse is also "loosed; set free" from their marriage. This is only logical, after all. If the "put away" spouse is truly no longer married, then obviously the one to whom they were married, and who put them away, is loosed and set free as well. If the "put away" spouse is truly UNbound, then to what or whom is the "putting away" spouse bound?! Obviously, both spouses are loosed when a divorce occurs.

I asked the question, "Is a divorce really a divorce?" And more importantly, "Does God recognize divorce?" To these questions Ron responded: "The answer to the question you asked is yes. A divorce is really a divorce. God recognized the divorce." Ron and I are again in agreement on this matter.

We further agree that acknowledging and approving an action are not necessarily one and the same. Although God does indeed recognize a divorce as a true severing of the marital union of two people, that does not mean He approves of this action. In like manner, a murder severs a person from life, and God recognizes that person as being truly dead, but that does not mean He approves of the action. It is a sin, and the person who perpetrated the murder will suffer the consequences of his action. The same is true of a divorce. A marriage is dead, and the one who killed it will have to answer for that sin.

I believe that Ron and I may differ on the nature of the consequences for those who have sinned against a spouse by breaking covenant with them, but this will come out in the course of our discussion. I am encouraged, however, that we are on common ground in our understanding of the nature and import of the words employed by our Lord and His inspired writers denoting "divorce." This is an important first step in coming to an understanding on the remaining issues before us in this debate.

For the benefit of those readers of this debate who might like to examine the specific words used in Scripture to characterize the breakdown of a marriage, I would refer them to my extensive and in-depth treatment of such in Chapter Four of my book Down, But Not Out. I would also invite Ron to offer any comment or criticism of my study of these terms if he feels such to be warranted in order to further our understanding of the proposition under examination.

• Al Maxey

Home Index