Divorce & Remarriage pt.5: 
“Remarriage”
Righteousness & Relationships  Part 11
1 Corinthians 7:10-40    6-13-10 

Summary: The core of 1 Cor.7 is vv.17ff – that no earthly status is more spiritual than another – so don’t fret about your status. The innocent party cannot remarry in a Christian marriage but can if the pagan leaves. Those divorced prior to salvation can remarry. Widows and virgins are free to choose and should choose freely. Those whose lives are threatened can flee. We should be slow to impose our judgment calls on others, but firm in requiring repentance on the clear points, and thorough in our forgiveness of the repentant.  
					
Introduction – No Marital Status is More or Less Spiritual
Can the Innocent Party Remarry?
Christian Marriage
Mixed Marriage
Jesus’ words didn’t cover mixed marriages
Sanctification of the unbelieving spouse and kids
Incompatibility is not grounds
Not Enslaved
Determine if the person is saved through Church discipline
What if the unbeliever wants to reconcile?
Called to live in peace
How do you know if you will save your spouse?
Can those divorced prior to salvation remarry?
Remain as you were at your calling
God recognizes secular marriages
Remarriage for the “loosed”
Contradiction?
Can virgins & widows marry or stay single?
Virgins
Widows
Believers
Not absolute law
Marriage is not happier than singleness
Can abuse victims divorce & remarry?
Other Grounds?
Summary
What about those who sin?
Difficult doctrine
Discipline for clear violations
No stigma for the repentant
Announcements
Appendix 1 – Observations from 1 Cor.7
Appendix 2 – Principles regarding divorce
Appendix 3 – outline of 1 Cor.7

1 Corinthians 7:10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife. 
12 To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 15 But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. The brother or sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us in peace. 16 How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? 
17 Nevertheless, each as the Lord assigned each as God has called, thus let him walk. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18 Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts. 20 Each in the calling in which he was called, in this let him remain. 21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you--although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22 For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ's slave. 23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. 24 Brothers, each man, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation God called him to. 25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. 26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is. 27 Have you been bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Have you been loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this. 
29 What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; 30 those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; 31 those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away. 32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs--how he can please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world--how he can please his wife-- 34 and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world--how she can please her husband. 35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord. 36 If anyone thinks he is acting in a wrong way toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. Let them marry. 37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin--this man also does the right thing. 38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better. 39 A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord. 40 In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is--and I think that I too have the Spirit of God. 

Introduction – Don’t fret about your marital status
Today I would like to bring to a close our study of divorce and remarriage so that next week we can resume our verse-by-verse study in Matthew. We left off last week in 1 Cor.7. 

1 Now for the matters you wrote about…

They wrote Paul with some questions, and Paul answered. So reading this chapter is like listening in on one side of a phone conversation. We do not know what they asked – all we have are Paul’s answers. But sometimes you can get a pretty good idea what the question was just by hearing the answer. A good example of that is in v.37. In v.37 Paul is about to give a single man permission to call off his engagement and remain single. But listen to how long it takes to give that simple permission:

37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin--this man also does the right thing.
Paul has to repeat no less than 4 times  – “Only remain single if you are doing so by your own free will and not under compulsion and not pressured, making up your own mind for yourself.” Does that give you a feel for the kind of thing that was going on? Someone was pressuring the people with the idea that celibacy was more spiritual than marriage. Being married is kind of earthly and worldly and non-spiritual, and so your standing before God is really better if you remain celibate. So singles were being pressured to stay single, married people were being pressured to be celibate – and if need be get divorced.
Paul actually agrees that singleness is a great way to go, but he strongly opposes their reason for promoting singleness. If you promote celibacy as being more spiritual than non-celibacy you are falling into a system of works-righteousness – where you gain a good standing with God by something like marital status.
So Paul begins by acknowledging, It is good for a man not to touch a woman. But then he immediately says, “But…” and goes on to make a case for marriage. If God made you for marriage and you try to remain single you are just going to end up in sexual sin. And there is no ceremonial condition that is more important than moral purity. It is a huge mistake to say, “I am going to improve my status before God by staying single even though it places me at greater risk of falling into immorality.” Marital status is a small issue; morality and purity and obeying God are the big issue.
I think the heart and soul of this whole chapter is in vv.17-27 where Paul talks about circumcision and slavery. Very often people see that section and think Paul is on a digression or a rabbit trail, but it is not a digression at all – it is the core of the point of the entire chapter. Here’s a literal translation of v.17:

17 Nevertheless, each as the Lord assigned each as God has called, thus let him walk. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches.

Each person should just carry out his assignment and calling from the Lord. Then he gives a couple examples: The first is circumcision. You are not automatically more spiritual or less spiritual just because you are circumcised or uncircumcised.
Then Paul moves on to another example - slavery. If you are a slave and do not have any ability to gain your freedom – do not let it trouble you because being slave or free has nothing to do with your ability to please God. No one is automatically more spiritual or in a better standing with God just because he is a free man or a slave. That has zero bearing on your status with God. 
Paul uses those two examples before getting to his main point, which is that marriage is the same way. There is nothing extra-spiritual about celibacy. And there is nothing extra-spiritual about being married.
Marriage is part of this temporal, vanishing world and so marital status, in and of itself, says nothing at all about how good a Christian you are or how much you can please God. Are there some spiritual advantages to marriage and singleness? Sure. If you are married that helps preserve you from sexual temptation. If you are single that enables you to have more freedom in ministry and a more undistracted attention on the Lord. So like circumcision or gaining your freedom, marriage and singleness are tools that can be used for spiritual purposes. But the marital status, in and of itself, has no significance whatsoever with regard to your standing with God. Neither option is automatically more spiritual or more godly.
And that should be a great comfort for those of you who are in a marital status other than what you would prefer. Maybe you are in a hard marriage and you cannot divorce because the Lord forbids that. Or you are in a hard singleness but you cannot get married because either it is forbidden by Scripture in your case, or because you just cannot find anybody to marry. So you are in a marital situation that you do not really want to be in, and you have all kinds of distress over it, but it is outside of your control to change it. So what do you do then?
Paul gave the answer when he addressed slavery. He said if you can gain your freedom then go ahead, but what if you cannot? What if it is not in your power to do that, and you are stuck as a slave for life?

21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you … 22 For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman

If it is outside of your control to change your situation then do not let it trouble you. It is not worth being troubled over because it is a temporal thing. It does not have eternal significance. It is no big deal. “What do you mean it is no big deal? I have to live out my entire life in a hard marriage or a hard singleness and you say that is no big deal? It is a HUGE deal to me!” Paul would be the last one to minimize the significance of anyone’s suffering. However for Paul the only thing that really matters is pleasing God. And you do not have less ability to please God in your marital situation than anyone else has.
In fact, the implication of v.17 is that the parts of your situation that are outside of your control are Christ’s assignment for you and God’s calling on your life right now.

17 Nevertheless, each as the Lord assigned each as God has called, thus let him walk. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches.

If you have the power to change your situation, and there is some good reason for doing so for kingdom purposes, fine. But if not, then realize that you are in the position you are in because God called you to it and the Lord Jesus Christ assigned it to you. So do not let it trouble you. It seems like a huge deal, but it is not. Marital status, in and of itself, is a non-issue. What matters is God’s calling. If you are a Christian you never have to worry about being stranded in a marital situation that will make it impossible for you to draw near to God or to please God.

Can the Innocent Party Remarry?
Christian Marriage
We left off last time after v.11. In a Christian marriage the guilty party must remain single or reconcile.  (And I realize some people object to that language. They do not like to speak about an “innocent” party because no one is perfectly innocent, and when a divorce happens very often the one who did not file is still guilty of being a bad spouse. But I still refer to that person as the innocent party in the divorce. Maybe they were not innocent in the marriage, but if they did not file, then they are innocent of the divorce. Being a bad spouse does not force the partner to divorce. So if someone gets a sinful divorce that is that person’s sin and it is not justified on the grounds that the other person provoked it by being a bad spouse. Every married person is a bad spouse in one degree or another, but that does not mean they are guilty of divorce.) Anyway, I have said that it seems to me the innocent party should also remain single. If God requires one person to reconcile it stands to reason the other must be willing and available as well. And that would fit Jesus’ words, when He said that anyone who marries the innocent party commits adultery. All that makes it sound like the innocent party is not free to marry anyone else.
Someone might object to this on the ground that it seems to violate Paul’s permission for single people to marry if they have strong desire. If the innocent party has to remain single and the guilty party is unwilling to reconcile, then the innocent party has no option of marrying. So the only single people who are barred from marriage altogether even if they are burning with desire is the innocent party in a divorce. I realize that is a difficulty. However I do not see any way around the fact that Paul is requiring both parties in a Christian divorce to remain single as long as the other one is still alive and single because of what Paul goes on to say.
Mixed Marriage
12 To the rest I say this…

Who are the rest? So far he has addressed single people and married people – what is left? What is left is mixed marriages. Paul has some special instructions for the believer who is married to an unbeliever.

Jesus’ words did not cover mixed marriages 
Notice how Paul begins: 

12 To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)…

When he spoke about Christian marriage he said:

10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband…

So his point about Christian marriages comes directly from Jesus’ words, and his point about mixed marriages comes from his own authority, since Jesus did not comment on mixed marriages. He is still an Apostle, so what he says still has the authority of God’s Word. So he is not saying this is his opinion and it might be wrong – all Scripture is God’s Word. Paul is simply pointing out the fact that Jesus never commented on the particular issue he is about to address.
That tells us two important things. First, the situation for mixed marriages is somewhat different than for Christian marriages. And second, Jesus’ comments did not cover every conceivable scenario. They were not meant to be taken as absolute statements that tell us everything we need to know about divorce and remarriage. Some people want to make Jesus’ words into a comprehensive theology on divorce and remarriage that apply exactly the same way to every situation. “Jesus said it is adultery to divorce and remarry, therefore in every context and in every situation it is always adultery to divorce and remarry except in the case of pornia – period.” But it is not “period” – it is “comma.” If we interpret Jesus’ words in a consistent way in the context of the Sermon on the Mount we have to acknowledge that Jesus did not mean His words to be taken as an absolute law. Everyone acknowledges that when Jesus condemns oaths or calling someone a fool – there are some exceptions, some other principles to take into consideration, other passages of Scripture that must be considered, etc. Jesus was not making a comprehensive law that is applied in an absolute way in every situation; He was simply giving a general principle. And in v.12 Paul covers one area that Jesus’ words did not cover. 
12 …If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 

So far the standard is the same as what Jesus said – no divorce.
Some of those pagans would become Christians and then wonder if they should dump their pagan spouse. That would be a natural assumption given the OT background. In Ezra 10 the people were commanded to divorce their pagan wives. But Paul lets us know that the situation is different now. In OT times if one of God’s people married a pagan, inevitably the pagan would have the greater influence and drag the Jew away from God. It happened every time – even to Solomon. But things are different now. In this age if a believer is married to a pagan the influence tends to go in the other direction.

Sanctification of the unbelieving spouse and kids 

14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 

In what sense are they sanctified? Is that referring to salvation? Is the unbelieving spouse saved just because he is married to a Christian? Obviously not - if that were the case then there could be no such a thing as a mixed marriage. If the unbeliever is automatically saved just because he is married to a believer then there would be no such thing as a believer married to an unbeliever. The word “sanctified” here simply means the unbelieving spouse is set apart in the sense that he has a great advantage over other unbelievers. He gets the splash effect of blessings that God showers on to the believing spouse, and he has a better chance than most of hearing the Gospel and having someone pray for him. And even if he rejects the gospel he has the benefit of having the beauty of the gospel lived out in his home.

1 Peter 3:1 Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. …4  the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit

And the same goes for the children. Children of a mixed marriage tend to end up becoming Christians. If mom tells the kid the Gospel and dad tells him whatever non-Christian beliefs he’s into most of the time the Gospel will make better sense to the kid and he will accept it. “Wouldn’t it be better if I divorced and got full custody of the kids?” No. It is better for the kids to have two parents – even if one is an unbeliever.
So in Ezra’s time it was necessary for God’s people to divorce their pagan wives or their hearts would turn away from God. But in this age you do not divorce a pagan spouse because the Holy Spirit lives in you and preserves you and has a sanctifying effect on those around you. We are absolutely forbidden to marry an unbeliever, which means, I believe, it is sin to even date an unbeliever, but if you’re already married do not divorce just because your spouse is lost.

Incompatibility is not grounds
And one thing this shows us is that incompatibility is never a legitimate ground for divorce.  
The most diametrically opposed, incompatible people in the world would be a Christian and an unbeliever, and so if that is not enough to make a divorce legitimate, then no kind of incompatibility would be enough. Incompatibility is never grounds for divorce.

Not Enslaved
So again – so far the standard is the same as if your spouse is a believer. The difference comes in v.15.

15 But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. The brother or sister is not bound in such circumstances

What does it mean he’s not bound? Bound to what? Does that mean he is free from the marriage altogether, or just free from having to try to contest the divorce? Some say that it is the latter. They say Paul is not saying you are freed from the marriage to the point where you could remarry someone else. You are still bound to that unbelieving spouse until death. The only thing you are free from is the responsibility to try to stop the divorce.
And one argument they offer to support that view is the fact that Paul uses a different word for bound here than he uses in Ro.7:2 & 1 Co.7:39. In those two passages Paul says that if you are no longer bound to your spouse, that means you can remarry. But both those passages use a different word for bound. They both use a word that just means “bound.” This is a different word, and it means “enslaved.” One pastor who holds this view said, “Paul has such a high view of singleness – there is no way he would refer to it as slavery. Therefore he must be referring to reconciliation – that is what you are not enslaved to.”
I would agree that Paul has a very high view of singleness, but doesn’t he also have a very high view of reconciliation? And a high view of marriage? So that argument does not hold water from what I can tell, because Paul is talking about enslavement to something, and whatever it is, It is something that is normally a very good thing.
What we need to understand is that when Paul refers to something as enslavement it does not necessarily mean that thing is bad. Paul uses this same word to say that we are slaves to righteousness (Ro.6:18), and slaves to God (Ro.6:20) and that Paul is a slave to all men for the sake of the gospel (1 Cor.9:19). And this word for enslavement was frequently used in that culture to refer to the bond of marriage.
So the point here is not that you are being set free from something bad. Paul is just saying you are no longer bound to that marriage – it is over. In a Christian marriage, after a sinful divorce there is a sense in which you are still bound – you need to stay single or reconcile, but you cannot marry someone else or it is adultery. But if an unbeliever leaves a believer, that believer is no longer bound to the marriage at all. And if you are not bound to a marriage, you are free to remarry. Remember, the clause that made a bill of divorce valid was the phrase “you are now free to marry any man.” So the concept of being free in a divorce context meant having the right to remarry. So if Paul wanted to communicate that if your unbelieving spouse divorces you, you are not free to remarry, it would not make any sense at all for him to say, “you are not bound.”
And beyond that, if you are still bound to the marriage in the sense that you are not free to remarry anyone else, then that means the situation with the mixed marriage is exactly the same as the situation with the Christian marriage. In both cases you cannot divorce, and if divorce happens you cannot remarry, and God wants you to reconcile, and God has called you to live in peace – everything is exactly the same. And if it is exactly the same why would Paul devote a whole separate section to it and start out that section by saying the Lord did not comment on this issue whereas the Lord did comment on Christian marriages? If the Lord’s comments apply exactly the same to both, what would be the point of saying Jesus commented on the one and not the other?
And that is another reason why it seems to me the innocent party in a Christian marriage is not free to remarry. Paul indicates that the situation is different in a mixed marriage, and the only thing that is different is that the innocent party is no longer bound, then the implication is that in a Christian marriage the innocent party is still bound. Is that unfair? Sure it is. There is nothing fair about marriage or about the Christian life for that matter. Is that unjust? No. God’s way is never unjust because God will make all injustices right someday. The question is not whether it is fair or just – the question is simply, is it God’s way?
And if it is then it is beautiful and lovely and good and better than any alternative. And if God’s way ever imposes a hardship on you I promise you He will make that up to you ten million times.
Determine if the person is saved through Church discipline
Divorce in a Christian marriage is different from divorce in a mixed marriage. When a pagan divorces a Christian, the bond of marriage is severed, but in a Christian divorce it is not. Now that brings up the very thorny question of how we determine if the divorcing spouse is saved or lost. That is an especially difficult issue in our culture because we live in a place where there is so little persecution, and so many false or incomplete “gospels” being preached, that there are millions and millions of people who claim to be saved who are not. Jesus spoke of the many who will say “Lord, Lord” and He will say “Depart from Me, I never knew you.” So many people in our culture think they are Christians just because they prayed the sinner’s prayer, or walked an isle or got baptized or signed a card, but they have no understanding of the gospel or the meaning of faith. So there are a lot of false Christians. But on the other hand you cannot assume that just because someone disobeyed God and got a sinful divorce that person is lost. Genuine Christians do sinful things all the time. 
This is where church discipline comes in. If someone claims to be a believer but divorces without grounds, he or she should be confronted by someone in the church and called to repentance. And if they do not repent, you take one or two others. And if they do not listen, take the whole church. And if they do not listen even to the church, put them out of the church. And at that point the best assumption is that the person is not a believer. The book of 1 John is very clear that a true believer does not continue indefinitely in unrepentant sin. If a person resists the entire church discipline process and still refuses to repent there is a much greater probability that he is lost than that he is saved. And so at that point the person should be regarded as an unbeliever, and, in my judgment, the innocent spouse is free to remarry.

What if the unbeliever wants to reconcile?
One other question that sometimes comes up is what if the unbelieving spouse changes their mind and wants to reconcile? Your non-Christian husband divorces you, but then after a while decides life without you is not what he thought it would be, and now he wants you back. What should you do? Should you remarry him or not?
In my judgment you probably should not. Scripture is very clear that a believer is never to marry an unbeliever. According to v.39 a woman who has been freed from a marriage is free to marry anyone she wishes, but only in the Lord.

1 Corinthians 9:5 Don't we have the right to take a believing wife?

2 Corinthians 6:14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. 

If you are already married to an unbeliever, stay married. But do not ever get married to an unbeliever. And it seems to me that would apply even if you used to be married to that unbeliever in the past. So should you reconcile with an unbelieving spouse? No, I do not believe you should.
What if you divorced your non-Christian spouse without grounds – so you are the guilty party? You were married to an unbeliever, your spouse did not commit adultery but you divorced anyway just because it was a hard marriage. Now you realize it was sin for you to do that – what should you do? Should you try to reconcile?
Again, Scripture does not speak directly to that. I can say for sure that you should repent of your sin, ask your former spouse for forgiveness for what you did. But should you then be willing to remarry that unbeliever? Probably not. It seems to me the principle of not marrying an unbeliever would trump the principle of reconciling after a sinful divorce, but the Bible does not say that. It is just my judgment call. You need to seek the Lord’s guidance in that situation. My sense is that the marriage should not have been ended but it was, and now it is over. And so if you remarry it should be to a believer. Called to live in peace

15 …but God has called us to peace.

The word peace here could possibly be referring to the lack of emotional turmoil (if your unbelieving spouse leaves you, do not let that get you all upset), but I think it is more likely that it refers to relational peace between you and the unbelieving spouse. So what Paul is saying is, “If the unbeliever refuses to reconcile so be it – but God has called us to peace. We are a reconciling people. If the unbeliever will not agree to reconcile and live in peace that is not your fault; but as far as it is up to you live in peace with them (don’t divorce).”

How do you know if you will save your spouse?
And then he gives the reason why: 

16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? 

If they will not agree to live with you so be it, but don’t you divorce them, because God called you to live at peace with them in the hopes that they might be saved. Remember 1 Pe.3 – a wife has a special ability to win an unbelieving husband without words through the beauty of her gentle, quiet, submissive spirit. So stay married because you might win your spouse to salvation. 
And even if they insist on divorcing you – still strive for as much peace as possible. Do not turn it into a bitter, harsh fight. Do not make it your objective to really soak them in court so you get the best settlement. Strive to be at peace even in the process of the divorce because even after the divorce you might be the one to lead them to the Lord, so do not destroy your witness by creating an adversarial relationship.
Now, is it guaranteed that your unbelieving spouse will be saved? I have often heard people say they knew for sure some person would eventually become a Christian. But Paul leaves the question open. He does not promise it will happen, he just says you do not know whether or not it will happen. But there is a good enough chance that it is worth staying married.

Can those divorced prior to salvation remarry?
Remain as you were at your calling
From there Paul moves to a new argument starting in v.17. That is the section I showed you at the very beginning, so I am not going to go back through it now. He simply makes the point that temporal circumstances (such as circumcision, social status, or marital status) have nothing to do with whether or not you can fulfill your calling. You are in the situation you are in because God assigned that position to you. He called you to that, so if you have no power to change it, do not let that disturb you. And if you do have the power to change it, only change it if you have a good reason to do so for the sake of the kingdom.
He illustrates that first with circumcision and slavery, then he applies it to marriage.

25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. 26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is. 27 Have you been bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Have you been loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 
Are you a virgin? That has no bearing whatsoever on whether you are able to obey God. Are you married? Are you unmarried? None of that matters with respect to your standing with God.
So unless you have a good reason, do not change your situation. And that is especially the case for the Corinthians because of what Paul calls the present crisis. We know there had been a severe famine at that time, so it could refer to that. We also find out in ch.11 that God was chastising this church because of their sins surrounding communion and many of them had become sick and some had died. So they were going through some very hard times, and when the seas are especially rough that usually is not the best time to change ships. And being single in a time like that can be advantageous in many ways. In 1 Tim.5:14 Paul urges young widows to remarry as a general rule. But that was a different time and a different place. In Corinth at this time the wise course for most singles was to be slow to pull the trigger on a marriage (unless they were burning with a lot of desire).
God recognizes secular marriages 
That is the main point of this section. But before we move on I would like to draw your attention to the implications of this section for the definition of marriage. Last week someone wrote this question on the prayer card: “Isn’t living together just ongoing fornication? Why should the church be subject to ever-changing laws? Shouldn’t the church govern itself in moral issues?” I assume that is a reaction to my definition of marriage. I said in previous weeks that a couple becomes married when they make their formal, legally binding vows. And what is legally binding is different from culture to culture. So it is the state that determines who is and is not married. If they go outside the bounds of what Scripture permits that is where we put our foot down. For example, if they want to try to invent a homosexual marriage we do not recognize that. But whatever their process is for the legal marriage of a man and woman – that is the standard that is recognized by God.
And last week the question came up about common law marriage, and I said I would recognize the couple as married in that case because they are married in the eyes of the state. I might urge them to go ahead and have a formal ceremony in the church before Christian witnesses, but I would not require that.
The person who wrote the question asks why we cannot just govern ourselves within the Church on moral issues. The answer is marriage is both a moral and a civil issue, and I do not know of any practical way we could disregard the state and operate only within the Church. Suppose we tried that. Agape Bible Church comes up with a procedure for a wedding that we recognize as valid, and nothing else counts as marriage. What are we going to do with people who did not follow that procedure? Maybe they were married in another church, but followed a different procedure. Or maybe they were married by the state when they were both unbelievers, and now they have become Christians. Or maybe they are from another country where the process is completely different. What are we going to do – assume everyone who has not followed our process is not really married in God’s sight? That would be neither practical nor biblical. One reason why I point to the standards of the state as determinative for valid marriage in God’s sight is because that is exactly what God does. In the Bible, non-Christians who were married by the process of a secular government are regarded by God as truly married.

18 Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 

What does that mean, “when he was called”? It means when he became a Christian. The day you were converted to Christianity was the day you were called by God. That is why you accepted the gospel and believed on that day, because God called you in a special way that day. So the day you were called is the day of you conversion, and Paul is saying, “Whatever your condition was when you became a Christian, do not be a in hurry to change it.”

27 Have you been bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Have you been loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife.

Notice – those who were married as unbelievers – completely apart from the church, married under the laws of the secular government – those people are considered bound in marriage and should not split up after they get saved. The marriages of pagans are recognized by God as actual marriages. So I do not see any way around the fact that those whom the government recognizes as married are actually married  as long as it involves a legally binding covenant between a man and a woman.
Remarriage for the “loosed”
One more point to notice from this section before we move on. It is significant that Paul tells those who have been loosed from a marriage that they can remarry without sinning. Here’s a literal translation of v.27:

27 Have you been bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Have you been loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. 

There are two groups here who can remarry without sinning – virgins and those who have been loosed from a wife. He speaks of marriage in terms of being bound to a wife. If you are married, do not seek to be loosed from that through divorce. Then he says, Have you been loosed from a wife? What does that mean? Some say it just means “Are you single?” But I do not think we can make the language mean that here. Paul just defined exactly what he means by loosed – it refers to divorce. “Couldn’t it mean loosed through the death of your spouse?” I think it can include that by implication, but that is definitely not the primary reference because Paul says, “Have you been bound to a wife, do not seek to be loosed.” If “loosed” means your wife dies then he would be saying, “Do not seek the death of your wife.” I don’t think that is what he’s saying. He is saying, “Don’t get a divorce.” In fact, being “loosed” is the most common way to refer to divorce in the NT.
The words “bound” and “loosed” are exactly the same grammatical form – passive voice, perfect tense. The perfect tense points to an action in the past that has continuing results in the present. The man who has been bound to a wife – he was bound to her on his wedding day and that has continuing effect in the present. And the man who has been loosed was loosed from her at some point with continuing effect in the present. So it is not talking about single people in general; it is talking about someone who used to be married and is no longer. And the primary reference is to those loosed through divorce.
So two groups - people who have been loosed from their spouse and virgins, those two groups, in a context of trouble and crisis, would be wise to remain single if they can – however

28 if you (the one who has been loosed from a wife) do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. 
Single people can go ahead and marry and it is not a sin, and that includes virgins, widows, widowers, and divorced people.

Contradiction? 
“Wait a minute – isn’t that a contradiction of v.11?”

10 A wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. 

In v.11 he said divorced people have to remain unmarried, Jesus said if they remarry it is adultery, so how can Paul say that if a divorced person remarries he hasn’t sinned? The answer is this – what Paul says is that if a “loosed” person remarries he has not sinned. Verse 11 is talking about a situation where the person who divorced is not actually loosed from the marriage. Same thing with Jesus. If you have a Christian who divorces without grounds – that person is not free to remarry. He or she is not loosed from the marriage. They are still bound as long as the former spouse is available for reconciliation. So they are not included in this “loosed” group. They are still bound.
But there are other divorced people who really are loosed. If your unbelieving spouse left you, then you are loosed – no longer bound. If you got a sinful divorce but now your former spouse has remarried, your first marriage is over and I believe you are loosed. And the context in this particular section has to do with your condition at the time you became a Christian. So the loosed, here, refers specifically to those divorced prior to conversion. So if your divorce happened before you were saved, you are free to remarry. 

Can virgins & widows marry or stay single?
Virgins
The next few verses (36-38) speak about virgins. There is debate about whether that is talking to fathers about giving their daughters in marriage, or to men who are engaged about whether to go ahead with the marriage or call it off. But either way the point for our purposes is the same. Paul ends up saying  it is perfectly OK for the virgin to marry and it is perfectly OK for her to remain single – as long as there is no coercion. 
Widows
And then Paul wraps up the chapter with this final statement:

39 A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband falls asleep, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but only in the Lord. 40 In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is--and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.

A few quick observations about that section.

Believers
First, I think it is speaking of a Christian marriage. Notice that the husband falls asleep. Falling asleep is a metaphor for death that is used by Bible writers only to refer to believers dying. When unbelievers die it is just death. But when a believer dies it is more like sleep, because it is just temporary. Their body will be lifeless only until Jesus returns, and then they will be raised from the dead. So the fact that he uses that metaphor is a clue, I think, that he is picturing a Christian marriage.

Not absolute law
Some argue from this verse for the view that says no remarriage after divorce ever. You are bound to your spouse until death – period. The problem with that view is it does not square with other passages that speak of the marriage bond being broken. For example, in Dt.24 when a man divorced his wife, and she married another man, that first marriage is completely terminated – even to the point where if the second guy dies, not only is she not bound to come back to the first guy – she is not even allowed to come back to the first guy. If your wife was divorced before you married her, say 20 years ago, and now she’s married to you and her ex-husband married another woman, and that ex-husband is now getting ready to move to New York, does your wife need to go with him? Is she still bound to him? No – even though he has not died yet, she is not still bound. So it is an over-application to say from this verse that a person is bound until death with no exceptions. Paul is giving the general principle, not an absolute law.

Marriage is not happier than singleness 
Another observation from this text is that Paul says the widow is happier if she remains single. So getting married for the purpose of happiness is a bad idea. Getting married for the sake of the kingdom is great. If you are called to a ministry that requires a partner – fantastic – get married. But do not get married for happiness. If you are not happy now you will not be happy married either. Marriage brings with it all kinds of unique joys and unique sorrows, and so does singleness. Someone once asked Socrates if he should marry or stay single, and Socrates said, “Whichever one you choose you will repent of.” Both have plenty of hardship. They are different joys and different sorrows, but if you think you will have more overall happiness from getting married you are mistaken. Nearness to God is what determines your overall level of joy – not marital status. And if any marital status gives more access to happiness it is singleness – at least in the Corinthian situation.

Can abuse victims divorce & remarry?
Now, at this point I still have not addressed the question of abuse. Is abuse grounds for divorce? If it is then everyone has grounds for divorce, because everyone who is married to a sinner gets mistreated by the sinner to some degree. Mistreatment is not an excuse to bail out of anything. God calls us to suffer, and whether it is a job or a marriage or a ministry or whatever – this life is a life of suffering. “But isn’t there a difference between the typical kinds of mistreatment that we all suffer and a battered wife who gets broken bones on a regular basis and whose life is in danger?” Yes, I think there is. In Mark 2 the Pharisees confronted Jesus about the fact that His Disciples were breaking the Sabbath rules. And Jesus gave a very interesting defense.

Mark 2:25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."

It was against the law of God for a non-priest to touch that bread, and yet Jesus implies that it was OK for David and his companions to eat it in their situation. Scripture is also clear that we are to submit to the governing authorities. Was David submissive to the will of Saul? Not while Saul was trying to kill him. David did not submit to that at all. In fact, he did the opposite of what Saul wanted – he ran away. And yet Jesus gives His stamp of approval on what David was doing.
And one of the things we can conclude from that is in a situation where your life or the lives of others are genuinely threatened, it is OK to flee – even if it means defying an authority in your life. David is not going to have to give an account on Judgment Day for why he ate the bread that was unlawful for him to eat, or why he was not submissive to his king. Those things were justified because his life was at risk. 
If someone slaps their spouse across the face is that automatically grounds for divorce?  No, I do not think it is. But if you are at risk of serious injury or death, I think it is appropriate to flee. And the same goes for your children. If you spouse is molesting them, or getting them hooked on drugs, or putting them in the hospital with broken bones routinely – I believe you are justified in getting them out of there.
Now, sometimes people will say, “If it is abuse you can separate but not divorce.” I don’t understand that. I guess people say that because they think divorce is forbidden in Scripture all the time, and separation is OK. But as we saw in the opening verses of 1 Cor.7 separation is forbidden too.
If there is a life-threatening situation you can flee not because separation is OK for the Christian but because if a life-threatening situation supersedes the law about the show bread and the law about obeying your king, I think it would also supersede the principle about staying with your husband. So if the man is unrepentant and unwilling to do what is necessary to change I think the wife is justified in not just separating, but divorcing.
Other Grounds?
How about other extreme circumstances? Someone asked about if your spouse is committing a crime by having illegal substances in the house. I don’t know the law but my guess is there is a way for a spouse to remain innocent in a situation like that in the eyes of the law without divorcing. What if he is lying on your joint tax return? Simple – don’t sign it. If you do not sign it you have not broken the law. There may come a point where you need to turn your spouse in to the authorities. And if he goes to prison, I do not think that is grounds for divorce.
What about if your spouse is a gambler and he is putting you farther and farther into debt? What if he refuses to work? Situations like that are incredibly hard for a spouse, but I do not see them as grounds for divorce. If you look to the Lord He will provide for you financially everything you need to do His will – even if your spouse is doing all kinds of foolish things.

Summary
So, when can you divorce? Where there is ongoing, unrepentant, hard-hearted adultery. And, I believe, where there is a real danger of serious injury or death for you or the kids. I do not know of any other circumstances. It is wrong to get a divorce because of incompatibility, discontent, or a desire to be with someone else, asceticism, or just because you have a really hard marriage.
When can you remarry? Generally speaking divorce means the right to remarry. So you have the freedom to remarry in the Lord after a divorce except in the case of a Christian divorce. If two Christians divorce they are still bound to one another as long as they are both single. But if one marries, then the bond is broken and the other one is free to remarry.

What about those who sin?
What if someone violates these principles? First we need to make sure we distinguish between a clear violation of the Word of God on the one hand and someone simply making a different judgment call than you on the other hand.
Difficult doctrine
Divorce is a very difficult, very complex doctrine. There is a large volume of scriptural statements that must be considered. Scripture refers to divorce close to 50 times in a dozen different books. And many of them are very hard passages – especially the primary one (1 Cor.7). I think 1 Cor.7 may very well be the most difficult chapter in the entire Bible. It has words that are not used elsewhere, it has complex, ambiguous grammatical structures, it has statements that can be taken several ways, there are very difficult textual variants so that in some cases we are not even sure what the original MSS said, the connections between ideas is hard to follow, and there are doctrinal difficulties. And then you add to that the fact that Paul uses such non-authoritative language. We are used to hearing Paul refer to his apostolic authority, commanding things in Christ’s name, threatening punishment, etc. But in this chapter, in place of reminders of authority and commands and threats, he keeps giving moderating comments and exceptions to everything.

6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 

12 To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)

25 about virgins: I have no command from the Lord

35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you

40 In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is 

This is not your typical Paul. There are people who are more dogmatic about their interpretation of this chapter than Paul himself was.

35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you 

The word restrict literally means to put a halter around someone’s neck to control behavior. It is ironic – Paul was so careful to make sure his advice did not restrict anyone, and yet so often people have used this chapter to do just that.
And instated of the normal Pauline comments like “If anyone does not agree with this, have nothing to do with him…” here he gives an exception on just about every point:

1 …It is good for a man not to touch a woman 2 But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife

5 Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent 

7 I wish that all men were as I am.  But each man has his own gift 

8  It is good for [the unmarried] to stay unmarried… 9 But if they don’t control themselves, they should marry,

10 A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried 

14 If any brother has a wife who is not a believer…he must not divorce her. 15 But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so.

21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you-although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 

27 Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned 

36 Let [the engaged couple] marry. 37 But the man who … has made up his mind not to marry the virgin-this man also does the right thing. 

He equivocates and gives exceptions on just about everything he says.
Don’t misunderstand. That is not to say the chapter is any less authoritative than any other chapter.  This chapter is God-breathed Scripture and has every bit as much authority as the 10 commandments or the Sermon on the Mount or anything else in Holy Scripture. But we need to realize it is not a list of legal commands, but a discussion about how to make judgment calls between options that are both morally allowable. There are some absolute commands in the chapter, for sure. But much of the chapter is advice based in practicality rather than morality.
So if there is a divorce situation, and the person holds a position on divorce that is generally accepted by evangelicals, I think we should be slow to condemn.  I realize this sounds strange coming from me, because I am usually pretty dogmatic about things.  But this really is a complicated issue. 
Now, as I say that I am scared to death because I know there will be a strong temptation for people to get into a hard divorce situation and think, “Well, the Bible isn’t clear, so I’ll just do what I want.” Please do not fall into that. One thing we know with absolute certainty is that there is such a thing as a sinful divorce or sinful remarriage, and you definitely do not want to be guilty of either one. But the fact is there are a lot of divorce situations that are not directly addressed in Scripture. And when that happens all we can do is study the principles we do have in Scripture so you know as much as possible about the heart of God on the matter. Strive to get to the point where you really do love God’s way. So when you see the thing God says about divorce or remarriage your heart says, “Yes! I see that as beautiful.” Earnestly seek God’s guidance in your situation with a heart that really is open to whichever direction He leads. Submit to what you feel God would have you do, but do not impose your judgment calls in those areas on others.
Discipline for clear violations
So let’s have mercy in the area of judgment calls, but let’s also have the courage to stand firm on the clear principles. The Church very often suffers from a fear of human suffering that often overshadows our willingness to heal it. We find someone in a hard marriage and we think, “Oh no – suffering. That is intolerable. Just get divorced, get remarried – do whatever you need to do, just do not make me walk with you through some long-term suffering.” We would rather compromise biblical principles in an effort to let people out of a hard situation than insist on God’s way and then do the hard work of walking by the person’s side through their pain. If someone makes a clear violation of some biblical principle it is imperative that we confront that person and require repentance. And where there is no repentance there must be church discipline.  
No stigma for the repentant
Where there is repentance, however, there must be complete forgiveness. It is a terrible thing that the church has tended to place a life-long stigma on divorced people. In some cases it is the unforgivable sin that disqualifies you from everything. You want to be in leadership, and you have a temper problem in your past? No problem, as long as it is in your past. You used to be spiritually immature? No problem, as long as it is in your past. But a divorce in your past? Automatically disqualified.
That’s ridiculous. Divorce is like any other sin – if it is in the past it is in the past. If you have repented, there is no lingering guilt. A person is what he is, not what he was. In 1 Cor.6 Paul gives a long list of different kinds of sinners (adulterers, slanderer, thieves, etc.) and then says

1Co 6:11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 

As I said last week in the Q&A – the qualifications for ministry are not about marital status – they are about character. Your past is irrelevant. What matters is your character right now. 
Once you have repented, your sin is gone.  It is separated from you as far as the east is from the west. Sometimes we are like little kids who are not satisfied with a sibling’s punishment, and so we want to mete out punishment of our own.
Why is that? Is it because we think of a sinful divorce more evil than other sins? It is interesting to me that in all the various lists of sins scattered throughout the New Testament, divorce never makes the list. There are lists of people who will never enter the kingdom of heaven, but divorce never makes those lists either. Greed makes in on almost every one. Jealousy, selfishness and factions are mentioned.  But never divorce. Any sin is a serious matter regardless of how often it is mentioned, but there is no biblical warrant at all for elevating divorce up to some kind of unforgivable status in the Church.  

Benediction: 2 Thess 3:4-5 We have confidence in the Lord that you are doing and will continue to do the things we command. 5 May the Lord direct your hearts into God's love and Christ's perseverance.