Marriage and Divorce – Mk 10:1-12

The Lord Jesus continued his ministry of preaching and teaching in various cities in the tradition of Jewish Rabbis. From his words and life, we can observe that the Lord’s preaching and teaching was a predominant component of his mission (Mk1: 38). His adopted ministry pattern is best understood against the backdrop of the OT prophets and Jewish rabbis rather than that of Greek oratory (which has influenced much of the church’s ministry styles over the centuries). As he spoke however, he steadily gathered against him people who wanted to test, corner and put him in a spot. Despite his constant efforts to steer clear of the limelight, he found himself pursued by the needy and accosted by his enemies.

The question of the Pharisees “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife (for any and every reason)?”(Mt 19:3) is an indication of the unfettered freedom which men in that culture enjoyed. They could claim to be lawful and yet divorce their wives for frivolous reasons. The Pharisees, who provided textual support for such unfair practices, constantly used what was lawful (permitted) as an excuse to escape from their commitments (as noted by Jesus in Mk 7:13). In this situation, they wanted to justify their use of a legal concession to divorce as a license to divorce as per their whim and fancy. This question was further dubious since their hidden intention was possibly to pit Jesus against their cultural authority –Moses, the Lawgiver who permitted divorce. They conveniently overlooked the passages in Scripture which revealed God as being clearly against divorce and in favor of reconciliation (Jer 3:6-14; Mal 2; Hosea 3:1), even when the spouse was guilty of adultery.

Jesus clarifies that the Law of Moses was given in the context of human sin and incorporated its reality (“the hardness of human heart”) and consequences. While it was morally superior, more organized and more comprehensive than the moral codes in surrounding cultures, it incorporated the imperfect context in which it was given – which included wars, poverty, idolatry and territorial skirmishes. In the case of marriage, it incorporated the reality that marriage meant imperfect people in an imperfect relationship and provided for an option to divorce, if “the hardness of heart” made it impossible for one partner to stay with the other. Like a Fence, it bore the dirt-marks of the very land it fenced from¹.

Questioned by the Pharisees who sought to lay a trap for him, Jesus skillfully moved discussion from a fence in the field to the Owner of the field who possesses the original blueprint who seeks the restoration & fertility of all his property. He led them beyond the Law of Moses to the creative Love of God as revealed in the Creation design and now revealed again by Christ.² While some of the Pharisees tried to exploit a sub-plot in the story to their selfish advantage, Jesus takes them to the Author and his original script – which the author had not abandoned, despite numerous interruptions! To ensure the completion of his story, the Author had entered the text! Those who follow the Author’s script understand his original design and see the relevance as well as the limitation of the sub-plot.³

The Lord Jesus clarifies that in the original script, the Creator made the first humans “male and female”. Not “male and male” or “female and female”. When we look at the Genesis text that Jesus was referring we find that it was not only male and female, but also female from male. While the man was created from the “dust” of the earth, his counterpart was created distinctly but not separately. The woman was a distinct being but created from man.⁴ The fruit of their union (men and women) comes out of the woman as a result of union between the man and the woman. Men and women were created from the same handful of dust in and by the same Divine hands. This speaks of the unity and the interdependence of the human race. There is no trace of independent origin or existence in the order, flow and the structure of human creation. “For this reason” ie the unity of the original unity man of the man (Gen 2:24), the man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and they shall become one flesh. This is an ontological truth that runs against the assumption of radical feminists that the masculine is unnecessary as well as the male chauvinists who believe that the feminine is a burden to be eventually excluded and destroyed.⁵

Another clue as to why the Lord considers marriage relationships sacrosanct may be found in the common Hebrew word “one” in Gen 2:24 (referring to the oneness of marriage) and in Deut 6:4 (referring to the oneness of God). The common word used is “Echad” which means composite unity – a reminder that the marriage (and sexual unity) of human beings is a unique and perhaps closest space- time image of the unity and diversity of the eternal Triune God of Biblical revelation⁶.

While the Lord makes allowance for divorce for marital unfaithfulness (Mt 19: 9) (which perhaps was the reason that Moses had in mind too), it makes it clear that he is against the separation of “what God has put together”. This is a reiteration of the Old Testament revelation that God hates divorce. Jesus goes on to add that if a man or woman leaves his spouse and marries another, it is adultery – a breaking of God’s law (Mk 10: 11-12). For if one is not averse to breaking a life-long covenant with a partner where God is witness, how can the man or woman be qualified for entering into another life-long covenant? I presume this is applicable to all marriages –whether Christian or otherwise – since all marriages are images of the Triune God and forerunners of the ultimate marriage –between Christ and the Church.

For those who have not initiated the divorce, but are victims of a spouse’s decision to divorce and remarry, it may be appropriate to treat the initiator’s decision to divorce and marry another as marital unfaithfulness. Hence the other spouse has the Lord’s permission to marry another if she or he chooses to. What is not clear from the text is whether the same permission is available to a husband or wife if the spouse initiates the divorce but does not remarry.⁷