By Jamie McNab
Home: www.t-cog.net
The following is an excerpt from the
minutes of the
Mr. Jamie McNab led the
next portion of the conference, which was a review of our understanding of
divorce and remarriage, but with a closer look at the meaning of the Greek word
porneia.
We have looked in
considerable depth at the subjects of divorce and remarriage at the past two
conferences. The
Our understanding has been
that for those married IN THE CHURCH — or where both married partners are
subsequently converted — marriage is till “death does them part.” Separation may sometimes occur, but
there can be NO REMARRIAGE.
However, some have been
troubled by the so-called exception clause given by Jesus. For example, in Matthew 19:9, Jesus says,
“And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his
wife, except it be for fornication (Greek word: porneia), and
shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put
away doth commit adultery.”
Is Jesus giving permission
here for divorce in some circumstances?
What is the meaning of porneia?
Does it mean sexual immorality —
unfaithfulness? Is it acceptable to
divorce for sex sins or immoral conduct — with the freedom then to
remarry? Just what was Jesus referring
to?
As we begin to seek
understanding of what Jesus could be referring to here, let us once again lay the
foundations of what we believe, and why.
Then, hopefully, the meaning of porneia in this passage will be
easier to arrive at.
There are a number of basic
scriptures that are TOTALLY CLEAR, with no trace of ambiguity. For example, “And they twain shall be one
flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore GOD HATH JOINED together, LET
NOT MAN PUT ASUNDER …whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry
another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and
be married to another, she committeth adultery,” Mark 10:9-12.
This passage in Mark is
very clear. Remarriage of anyone bound
in marriage by God is ADULTERY. Jesus is
quoted saying the SAME THING in Luke 16:18.
In Romans 7:2-3, the
Apostle Paul states, “For the woman which hath an
husband is bound by the law to her husband SO LONG AS HE LIVETH; but if the
husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then IF, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be CALLED AN
ADULTERESS: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she
is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.”
It would be many years
after the time of Christ before the New Testament scriptures were collected
together for everyone to read. Up
till then, many of those in the early New Testament church would only have a
part of the scriptures. Those who
only had access to, say, the books of Mark, Luke or Romans, would read the very
plain commandment — DO NOT DIVORCE.
To those converted in
Corinth, Paul wrote, “And unto the married (in God’s Church) I COMMAND, yet not
I, but the Lord, LET NOT the wife depart from her husband: But and if
she depart, let her REMAIN UNMARRIED, or be reconciled to her husband:
and let not the husband put away his wife,” 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. So the position was clear to those in
But did Jesus mean
something different to the readers of the gospel written by
Matthew? Was Jesus CONTRADICTING HIMSELF
when He allowed the putting away for porneia? Did the Apostle Paul not know of Christ’s
teachings?
We all know that, as human
beings, there are times when we do not get along. That occurs in marriage all too often. Sometimes, a husband and wife just “grow
apart.” At other times, one partner can
become abusive, and make life difficult — almost intolerable — for the
other. Sometimes, alcohol wrecks a
relationship. Sometimes there is
infidelity, and one partner has one, or more, “affairs” with someone else.
From a human
perspective, it seems kind and considerate to give those involved in such
difficult relationships “another chance” at happiness — freedom to
divorce and remarry if the marriage has “irretrievably broken down.”
Out of such feelings of
kindness, many have sought to find biblical reasons to allow such second
chances at marital success. But once
that first step is taken, there seems no end to the reasons that are eventually
given to permit divorce. Consider, for
example, the teaching of the Worldwide Church of God. In its Special Policy Statement
of
The question we need to
answer is not what WE think would be a kind and caring way to deal with
marriage difficulties, but what does GOD SAY.
The instructions in Mark,
Luke, Romans and First Corinthians are very plain. NO DIVORCE.
So what, then, does the
exception clause in Matthew 19:9 (and chapter
Let’s now look more
closely at this word porneia, and see if we can determine HOW Christ
meant it to be understood.
We pick up the story in
Matthew 19:3. The Pharisees came to
Jesus testing Him about divorce.
“Can you get divorced for just any reason?” they asked.
The Pharisees all agreed that divorce
was permissible, but disagreed among themselves as to
what was an acceptable reason for divorce. Two of the major schools — or groups — of
Pharisees at that time were the
The Pharisees wanted Jesus
to pick sides. Which school of the
Pharisees was right?
Jesus reply was PLAIN.
“Have ye not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and
female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall
cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be ONE FLESH?
Wherefore they are no more
twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, LET NOT
MAN PUT ASUNDER,” Matthew 19:4-6. This
is exactly what we have read in Mark 10, Luke 16, Romans 7 and 1 Corinthians 7;
one-hundred per-cent consistency!
But this rather took the
Pharisees aback. They had assumed
divorce was acceptable, and just wanted Jesus to specify the conditions (then
no doubt they would have tried to tangle Jesus further with their devious
arguments). However, Jesus stopped them
in their tracks — those whom God binds are one flesh, and men are to
STOP SEPARATING! This was NOT what the
Pharisees expected to hear!
“But what about what Moses
said,” cried the Pharisees? “Didn’t he
permit divorce?” Jesus explained that
Moses may have made certain concessions because of people’s hard hearts, but “from
the beginning it was not so.”
It was certainly not God’s intention or purpose. And, irrespective of what Moses may, or may
not have said, Jesus continued “I SAY, Whosoever shall put away his
wife, except it be for fornication (porneia), and shall marry another,
committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit
adultery,” Matthew 19:9.
Now just what was Jesus
referring to here? If Mark 10, Luke 16,
Romans 7 and 1 Corinthians 7 all state that there can be NO DIVORCE, is Jesus
now contradicting the teaching given elsewhere? Having said plainly in verses 4-6 of Matthew
19 that there can be no divorce, is He now contradicting Himself a mere
three verses later?
Some would say that
porneia means adultery or other sex sin, and Jesus was here
permitting divorce for such immorality.
However, if that were the case, Jesus need only say that He agreed with
the teaching of the Pharisaic
If we think about it, most
of us would agree that sex sin in marriage would be very difficult to come to
terms with. It would no doubt strain a
marriage relationship to the very limit.
From a purely human perspective, many (even in the Churches of
God) would feel that divorce might well be the best way to deal with
infidelity. So IF Jesus had said,
“Divorce is permissible where the marriage has broken down through immoral
behaviour and unfaithfulness,” most would probably say, “Yes, it’s sad, but
that’s a very reasonable and understandable response to human weakness.”
However, that is NOT how
the disciples responded to what Jesus said!
They did not say, “Yeah, we always thought Shammai was on the right
track, it’s only when your wife’s been unfaithful you can dump her. Right on, Jesus!” On the contrary, they were ASTONISHED by what
Jesus said! “His disciples say unto him,
If the case of the man be so with his wife, IT IS NOT
GOOD TO MARRY!”
The disciples understood
that Jesus had virtually closed the door on divorce. To all practical intents and purposes,
Jesus was teaching that divorce was not available! And if you couldn’t get
divorced, no matter how bad your wife turned out to be, it was better NOT TO
GET MARRIED thought the disciples! So
whatever Jesus meant by His so-called exception clause, it clearly wasn’t an
easy exit from an unhappy marriage. And
the disciples were shocked by the very limited nature of this “exception.” They lived among a “wicked and adulterous
generation” where divorce was common.
Jesus had just ended such human options!
So, if Jesus was not
siding with Hillel or Shammai, and had stunned the disciples with His comments,
just what did He mean by the term porneia? And how could ANY exception be consistent
with the plain teaching in Mark 10, Luke 16, Romans 7 and 1 Corinthians 7 that
there is NO DIVORCE?
There is one other passage
where Jesus mentioned the same exception, Matthew 5:32. There we read, “But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause
of fornication (Greek: porneia), causeth her to COMMIT ADULTERY:
and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.”
This passage appears in
the so-called Sermon on the Mount. Jesus
has been explaining how we are to live by the SPIRIT of the law, not just by
the LETTER. In leading up to His
comments about divorce, Jesus SETS THE STANDARD for us as Christians — as His
followers. He states, “For I say unto
you, That except your righteousness shall EXCEED THE
RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, ye shall in NO CASE enter into the
kingdom of heaven,” Matthew 5:20. Jesus
is quite blunt here. If we live only
according to the standards and values of the Pharisees and scribes WE WON’T BE
IN GOD’S KINGDOM!
Jesus then takes a number
of illustrations, to show EXACTLY WHAT HE MEANS.
Firstly, He mentions how
“in olden times” they were told not to murder. Now, says Jesus, I AM SAYING to you not even
to GET ANGRY without a good reason! A
much higher standard than taught by the Pharisees!
Then Jesus refers to
adultery. That was forbidden “in olden
times,” but now, says Jesus, I AM TELLING you, don’t even LOOK LUSTFULLY at a
woman. Again, a much higher
standard than would be taught by the Pharisees.
Then Jesus comes to the
topic of divorce. You heard, “in olden
times,” said Jesus, that any divorce had to be acknowledged with formal, legal
documentation, but now I AM TEACHING you there is to be NO DIVORCE (unless for porneia). Whatever Jesus meant, it must obviously be a
MUCH HIGHER STANDARD than the Pharisees taught.
The whole point of
Jesus’ teaching in verses 21-32 of Matthew 5 is to illustrate, with real
examples, just HOW His teachings far exceed the “righteousness” of the
Pharisees. Many of the Pharisees taught
that divorce was permissible only for adultery and sex sin in
marriage (the
Mr. Herbert Armstrong
looked into these puzzling passages many years ago, and concluded there was ONE
EXPLANATION that allowed ALL these scriptures to perfectly harmonise.
Mr. Armstrong concluded
that the word porneia — in both Matthew
However, Mr. Armstrong’s
view was that we all live in a world which has long since lost the true
values. Many young men and women
have “made mistakes” in their lives.
They have few decent role models, and face huge pressures to conform to
the “ways of this world.” Mr. Armstrong
felt the “Christian response” to finding that one’s wife (or husband) had been
involved in pre-marital sex would be TO FORGIVE — to accept the other as
one’s partner — and to enter wholeheartedly into the marriage. And God, of course, would then BIND — or YOKE
— that marriage, which would be binding until death.
If, however, the one
partner was only willing to accept a virgin as a husband or wife, and
had made that plain, then clearly there must be an element of deception
or concealment or fraud if things turned out otherwise subsequent to the
wedding. In that situation, if
forgiveness was not going to be available, Mr. Armstrong recognised that
Matthew 19:9 permitted a putting away.
In reality, this did not represent the breaking of a God-bound
marriage. God would not yet have bound
this couple.
This explanation of Jesus’
teaching provides us with complete consistency.
There can be no divorce and remarriage for ANY marriage which has been
BOUND BY GOD. Matthew 5 and Matthew 19
are in complete harmony with the various other passages we looked at earlier.
But some object to this
explanation of porneia in Matthew 5 and19. They point out that the scripture says
“whosoever shall put away his WIFE.” If
Jesus calls the woman a WIFE, then surely, they say, the couple must have been
bound as husband and wife?
Otherwise, she wouldn’t be a wife, would she?
Mr. Armstrong pointed out
that this overlooks the custom of the day among the Jews (and some others) that
treated a couple as legally husband and wife FROM THE TIME OF THEIR BETROTHAL —
which might be up to a year before they were actually married!
There is a Biblical
example of this in Jesus’ own physical family, as we see in Matthew
1:18-20. “Now the birth of Jesus Christ
was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused (betrothed or
engaged) to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child
of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph HER
HUSBAND, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was
minded to put her away privily. But
while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto
him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee
Mary THY WIFE: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.”
Joseph and Mary are said
to be HUSBAND and WIFE, even BEFORE they were married!
This principle can also be
seen in the teaching given to Old Testament
So, it is quite in order,
scripturally, to interpret Jesus’ instructions in Matthew 5 and 19 as referring
to the putting away of a betrothed wife who has been found guilty of
fornication — pre-marital sex — porneia.
Many now disagree with Mr.
Armstrong’s explanation of these passages which deal with the exception
clause. They believe Mr. Armstrong did not
understand the meaning of porneia (just as the WCG came to believe Mr.
Armstrong didn’t understand the meaning of “born again” or gennao!). Many among the Churches of God want to find
that porneia can mean there are MULTIPLE REASONS for divorce.
Rather than following Mr.
Armstrong’s approach — coming to
understand the purpose and meaning of MARRIAGE, and then
interpreting a potentially unclear scripture by its overall context in the
meaning of marriage — these people choose to focus on the “technical” meaning
of the Greek word, then attempt to build their doctrine on what they think
the word “should” mean.
Here is a typical example
of how Mr. Armstrong’s understanding is discredited. Mr. Frank Nelte, writing in The Journal
of
These comments by Mr.
Nelte are, however, inaccurate.
Mr. Armstrong NEVER attempted to LIMIT the meaning of porneia to
“sex before marriage.” Mr. Armstrong
happily acknowledged that porneia has a number of different meanings, but
stated that, IN THE CONTEXT OF MATTHEW 5 & 19, it could ONLY mean
fornication — as any other meaning in Matthew 5 and 19 would CONTRADICT the
many scriptures relating to the permanence of marriage.
Here is what Mr. Armstrong
actually wrote:
So, as far as the meaning
of the word porneia is concerned, Mr. Armstrong is in complete agreement
with the Greek lexicons. He is in
complete agreement with Mr. Nelte, as far as the technical meaning of the word
is concerned.
The big difference is that
Mr. Armstrong understands that the PRECISE MEANING of this very general
word must be derived from the CONTEXT in which it was used.
One of the meanings of
porneia is sexual immorality.
However, for Jesus to say in Matthew 5 that one can divorce for sexual
immorality is TO CONTRADICT many other plain scriptures, and to have a
standard of righteousness no different from the Pharisees.
Here are some
illustrations that show how porneia can have different meanings, which need to
be understood IN CONTEXT:
So the point is
clear. Porneia has a range of
meanings, and it is the context that gives us the understanding.
Is Porneia Adultery?
Some want to say that
Jesus was really referring to adultery in Matthew 5 and 19. Adultery, they say, is the exception for
which one can be divorced.
Whilst the term porneia
can include all types of sexual sin, as we have seen, there is in fact an
entirely separate Greek word for adultery — moicheia. There are a number of passages where both
terms are used, showing that they have different meanings.
In the final analysis, we
have to determine which meaning of porneia is appropriate FROM THE
CONTEXT. The context means not just the
IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, but also the intent and purpose of the WHOLE OF SCRIPTURE
and God’s overall purpose. EVERYTHING
must fit together in perfect harmony.
The intent is clear. Jesus said, DON’T PUT AWAY!
IF we accept that a God-bound marriage is
binding till “death does them part,” then there is ONLY ONE meaning of porneia
that CAN be correct — pre-marital sex, concealed from the husband
(or wife), where God will allow the partners to separate — provided they act
immediately upon discovery.
Any other explanation —
allowing termination of a God-bound marriage after ten or twenty years —
contradicts the PLAIN TEACHING of Mark, Luke, Romans and 1 Corinthians. It becomes acceptable to be a covenant-breaker.
In his booklet Marriage
and Divorce, Mr. Armstrong concluded:
There was considerable
discussion of all these points after Mr. McNab’s presentation. Many felt that Mr. Armstrong’s explanation of
porneia harmonised completely with the understanding of marriage and
divorce that we had arrived at in our past two conferences. Some, however, believed that there was still
more to the meaning of porneia than had been covered, and that it may
have to be looked at further at some future time.
Further Bible articles and audio messages can be
found at www.t-cog.net