They began reasoning among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say, ‘Then why did you not believe him?’ But shall we say, ‘From men’?”—they were afraid of the people, for everyone considered John to have been a real prophet (Mark 11:31-32).

Notice that the chief priests were not at all concerned with the truth but only what advantage they could get over Jesus. That is why Jesus did not answer them, for He recognized that whatever answer He gave, they would turn it against Him. 

Today, we label the attitude of the chief priests as "defensive". When people are defensive, they are not being reasonable or charitable but simply self-protective. Now, the motivation of the chief priests went beyond self-protection, for they approached Jesus first. They were trying to entrap Him, so that they might catch Him in His words. They were not merely being defensive but antagonistic. Oftentimes, there is but a short leash between defensiveness and antagonism. 

Friends, I have often promoted open discussion of issues, even controversial ones. I am not among those that advise against conversation over matters of politics and religion. These two topics perhaps constitute two of the most important themes impacting people in society. Will we stop discussing important matters simply because they are controversial? And what isn't controversial in one circle or another? No, dear friends, we must talk about them.

But, that said, there is a place for non-answering or silence when among defensive and antagonistic people. I have had more than my fair share of discussions, where ad hominem attacks (i.e. personal name calling) replaced honest and earnest discussion of God's Word. 

We ourselves must not be defensive or antagonistic when we discuss controversial matters. No one enjoys confrontation, but it is necessary to promote holiness in the church; Yet, it needs to be done with gentleness and with a view to restoration. In the same way, no one enjoys controversy for the sake of controversy, but we must discuss the issues, recognizing that they are important and with a view to better understanding God's truth. 

Almost every issue that is important is controversial. Perhaps it is the enemy that makes it so. Instead of avoiding them, let's pray for a humble and charitable spirit that seeks advancement in truth. We choose avoidance because a defensive or antagonistic attitude by one side or the other does not promote edification.

Rather than choosing to remain in ignorance, can we not engage with one another as brothers in the Lord with whom we will spend eternity? When in discussion, let us celebrate those that prove us wrong in some matter of Scripture. Are we not the better for it?

Let us not be so concerned with our position or power or reputation since all these things will be awash in eternity. Instead, let us speak the truth in love. Then we will be found to be united around truth and not around rebellion. I would rather be with Noah in the ark than united with the masses in rebellion outside the ark. I would have stood with Phineas in his zeal for the LORD rather than with the leaders of Israel, who were deliberating over what to do with their beautiful Midianite mistresses, who were leading them into idolatry. Let us be sanctified by the Word of truth and that truth alone. Unity is disasterous apart from truth. 

Let us also take the words of Solomon to heart:

Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you;
rebuke the wise and they will love you.
Instruct the wise and they will be wiser still;
teach the righteous and they will add to their learning (Proverbs 9:8-9).

While it is true that it is fruitless to discuss controversial matters before the wicked and mockers, whose interest is only defensive and antagonistic, let us be better than that. Let us be wise and righteous, discussing every important matter, even the controversial ones, and as we do so, let us grow in wisdom and learning. 

And He entered the temple and began to drive out those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves; and He would not permit anyone to carry merchandise through the temple. And He began to teach and say to them, “Is it not written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations’? But you have made it a robbers’ den.” (Mark 11:15-17).

Jesus' cleansing of the Temple is found in every gospel. There were two separate occasions of it. The synoptic gospels record one occasion near the end of His ministry (Matthew 21:12-17; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-48). John records another occasion at the beginning of His ministry (cf. John 2:13-17).

Now, traditionally, these passages are interpreted in such a way as to point out that Jesus was not against all merchandising within the Temple. He was only against the unjust practice of it, namely, that the sellers were cheating the buyers. Preachers will point out that Jesus was against making the Temple "a den of thieves." 

I would like to take this generally accepted view to task and make the case that Jesus was against all merchandising in the Temple. 

First, notice that all the synoptic gospels record that Jesus not only drove out the thieving sellers. He also drove out the victim buyers as well. While it is true that Jesus was highlighting the corrupt practices of the sellers, this corruption was not merely the unequal exchanges only but the very act of selling and buying within the Temple. 

Second, notice that when Jesus taught them, He did not contrast "just" selling from "unjust" selling but rather He highlighted the purpose of the Temple. It was for "prayer," not for the exchange of money and goods. Again, I believe all merchandising was in view. 

Third, notice that while Jesus highlights thievery in the cleansing of the Temple at the end of His ministry, He highlights merchandising in general in the cleansing of the Temple at the beginning of His ministry. So, we read in John,

To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” (John 2:16)

Selling doves was not the issue, for such sacifices were permitted for the poor (cf. Leviticus 14:21-22; 12:8). The issue was that they were selling them in the Temple, which was a place of worship. And what is highlighted is not unjust practices but the very practice of merchandising itself within the Temple.

Fourth, look at our passage in Mark today. We read that Jesus "would not permit anyone to carry merchandise through the temple" (Mark 11:16). So, not only was Jesus getting rid of the unjust merchants, He also sought to stop all traffic of merchandise through the Temple. It is as if Jesus was guarding the sanctity of the Temple. If the people were coming to pray and worship God, they could pass. But they would not be permitted to do any buying and selling there. They would have to conduct such business outside of the House of God. 

Finally, Jesus cites Isaiah 56:7, "My house will be called a house of prayer for all the nations" (Mark 11:17), a passage that points to the Temple being a witness and a place of worship for Gentiles as well as Jews. When such merchandising was taking place in the House of God, how would the Gentile world perceive the worship of Yahweh God?

Friends, I realize that this is a "controversial" topic today, as many mega churches today have Christian bookstores, coffee shops, and restaurants in the church, where they sell books, CDs, all kinds of Christian trinkets, as well as food and drink. Many would say that the church building is not the equivalent of the Jewish Temple. But in saying this are we simply trying to rationalize away the principle of what Jesus was teaching? Was Jesus' zeal for God's House merely a dramatic defense of a ritualistic regulation? 

If I'm an unbeliever or a young believer, and I want to hear God's Word preached by a gifted man of God, must I pay $9.95 to buy the CD? I remember receiving a business card from a Realtor at church, and I could not help feeling there was something wrong about this exchange of information at church.

Are we turning God's House into a marketplace? 

I remember going to another large church in Southlake. When I entered, the first thing I saw was a coffee shop right in front of the entry into the sanctuary. I suppose it was built for convenience, so that the congregant could buy a cup of coffee before going into worship? Just past the coffee shop was a bookstore, selling books, CDs and DVDs of the ministry staff and others. There were also highlighters, bookmarks, Bible covers, etc. that I could purchase there. Again, I felt a little ill at ease with all this. 

Again, I ask, "Are we turning God's House into a marketplace?"

A little more removed from such blatant merchandising, I remember coming out of a service into a cafeteria area where a couple of fund-raisers were going on. Admittedly, unlike the instances I've mentioned, there was no profit involved here, and those making and serving the fundraisers were sacrificially giving their time and resources to raise funds for other ministries within the church. 

When I think of the servers, my heart is moved because of their giving and sacrifice; however, I am again a little put off by this exchange of goods for money in the House of God. Even though the ends are noble, the means to such ends run contrary to what Jesus was trying to teach with respect to the sanctity of the gathering place for worship and prayer. Must we employ such commercial methods to get the people of God to contribute to worthy ministries?

Friends, those of you that read my comments here know that I am not one to run from controversy, but I raise issues that others are afraid to raise or else consider too politically incorrect to raise. I think I'm attending a church now, where it is okay to do this, as long as it arises from a sincere, honest, and humble desire to understand and communicate the Word of God. The pastor is himself somewhat controversial, but I see him genuinely centered in God's Word. 

I would be thrilled if someone could show me a better way to perceive these and other Scriptures. I am always open to dialogue. Otherwise, I hope members and leaders alike will reconsider some of their church practices in view of what Jesus did and taught here.

 Mark 10

29 Jesus said, "Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, 30 who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life

All things work towards good. 5 minutes, 5 hours, 5 days, 5 centuries.. Eventually! An eternal perspective is required to grasp this promise and to run with it. He says you will receive the hundredfold, but this is similar to understanding Hebrews 11:1

“Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the people of old received their commendation. By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.”

If you were there to see the universe created there is no faith to use to understand. If you have your reward, there's no faith to cause excitement and anticipation. If you are holding your cash, there is no faith to confidently purchase items.

These that give up which was spoken of, will have the faith to receive their deed to a hundredfold reward; their commendation is at hand. One would not choose to give these up if they did not have something as a deposit, faith and therefore believing in Jesus.

Mark 11

22 And Jesus answered them, "Have faith in God. 23 Truly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will come to pass, it will be done for him. 24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

This passage by itself just screams a word of faith teaching. But nothing should be taken by itself in the scriptures

But this would be so odd, Jesus always pulled attention from us to God, spoke of heaven reflecting on earth through humans ideally, but through the saints normally, and the importance of believe in Jesus means you will make decisions that will move you towards blessings – not just that believing invokes a power for blessings but a more mechanical system of, because you believe you will decide and initiate movements, at times unknowingly, towards blessings.

Consider the following as the saying is broken down:

“Have faith in God”

John 15:7, remain in me and I in you to bear fruit.

 “Whoever says and does not doubt in his hart, but believes it will pass…”

James 1:6, no doubting person will receive anything from the lord, they are unstable in his ways. (it is not that God will not send a blessing, he blesses believers and non-beleivers, after all he is Goodness! But because they are unstable they will move out of the blessings firing range – a mistake)

“Believe that you have received it and it will be yours.”

Matthew 18:18, what has been found in heave will be bound in earth, what is loosed in heave will be loosed in earth. If you believe that it has been prepared for you in heaven and so you ask for it, it is done. Heaven’s reflection on you on earth.

Simply looking at this passage as a word of faith passage become awkward if you continue to the next verse; an odd conclusion found in verse 25:

And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses

A simplified reading would go: Jesus cleanses the temple, withers a tree and explains that this is nothing. If you only believe what you say it’ll happen – as you speak, forgive so you will be forgiven.

Replace the ‘forgiving’ idea with the idea of let things be; don’t hold anything against or for anyone. When you are praying, before you ask for anything we should stand before God knowing him. When Jesus taught us to pray the opening of the prayer recognizes God: You are Holy, You are Great, You are Sovereign, You are loving, You are right, Your Word will be, You are my Master, You are my Loving Father – My King and Lord. Consider how your prayers would change if every time you prayed you could fully remind yourself of who God is.

Recognize this as you approach the Lord and he will recognize himself as these things to you. Then the mountains will be nothing to you.

“Have faith in God,” Jesus answered. “Truly I tell you, if anyone says to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins." (Mark 11:22-25).

This verse on face-value seems to support a "name it - claim it" theology; however, both in practice and on biblical principle, this is not the case. What might be helpful is to consider similar texts that add insight to the promise. For example, consider 1 John 5:14-15,

This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him.

Notice that verse 15 seems to be an exact parallel to the promise in Mark; however, verse 14 provides an important boundary to the promise, namely, "according to his will." In other words, the promise is bound by the will of God. This is consistent with what Jesus told the disciples in John 15:7,

If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.

Also, it is consistent with the limitations that James puts on prayer:

When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures (James 4:3).

Therefore, the "believing you have received it" is conditioned on you knowing the will of God. Since Jesus perfectly knew the will of God, what He prayed for was always granted to Him. And for us, the more aware we are of God's will, as revealed in His Word and as discerned in our lives, the more likely it is that God will grant us what we pray for. This is why I have in the past defined prayer in this way: As a way for us to align our will with God's will. Oftentimes, by prayer we can discern whether we have correctly understood and applied the Scriptures. Our prayers will reveal whether we understand what is important to God. God's answer to our prayers will teach us whether we are following His program or we are off His program. Therefore, prayer is not merely speaking into the air whatever is on our minds, nor is it informing God of what He does not already know. No, dear friends. Prayer is a God-given vehicle to transform our thinkiing and behavior so that they become ever more conformed to His will. As Oswald Chambers once wrote, "It is not so much that prayer changes things, but prayer changes me, and I change things" in accordance to God's will.

We should understand that the weakness in our prayers is this very thing, that we don't pray in accordance with God's will. However, this is also where the Spirit helps us in our weakness. Whatever we pray, the Spirit takes our prayers and reorients them to God, so that what He receives and answers is only what is in accord with His will:

In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God (Romans 8:26-27).

Therefore, even in our weakness, we ought to pray. But as we pray, we ought to keep improving in our prayers. As we study God's Word and meditate on His revealed will, I believe we will have stronger prayers, by which I mean that our prayers will be more in keeping with God's will. And then, when combined with strong faith, as Jesus promised, we can be assured that God will give us whatever we ask for. A good example of this at work in the Bible is Acts 4:23-31,

On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and the elders had said to them. When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. “Sovereign Lord,” they said, “you made the heavens and the earth and the sea, and everything in them. You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:

Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen. Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word with great boldness. Stretch out your hand to heal and perform signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus.”

After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

A blind man pursues Jesus desperately shouting, he wouldn't be denied.

(Matt 10:46-52)

"Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (which means "son of Timaeus"), was sitting by the roadside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"

"Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." So they called to the blind man, "Cheer up! On your feet! He’s calling you." Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus. "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see." "Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road."

Several things came to me in this passage. Firstly, throughout Jesus ministry to the poor, almost without exception, he uses the words your faith has healed you. We take this metaphorically I suppose, as God does this healing. But I am beginning to take the expression more literally - not that we can heal ourselves without Christ, But that our faith brings God to the cause. Note in (Mark 5:30) a woman desperate for healing swipes at Christ's garment. "At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my clothes?" In this case we could argue that Faith literally healed the woman - Jesus was portrayed as an unsuspecting bystander (of course God permitted it).

Faith is at the heart of our religion and theology. Without faith we cannot please God (Hebr 11:6). Faith heals and faith saves. Yet faith seems to be the most elusive, the bible discusses many levels of faith. The great faith of a pagan (Matt 15:28), ye of little faith (Matt 8:26), faith as small as a mustard seed (Matt 17:20 ). But oh the power of faith, to heal sickness, to transform lives, to have redemption and please God.

 I love this passage because the blind man, convinced Jesus could heal him, would not keep quiet and would not be held back - he acted on his faith. He pursued Christ relentlessly because he knew He would be healed. I often feel that Christians are discouraged in their walk with God as they pray and read their bible but their prayers are not answered. I believe that our faith is made real when we act on it, following Jesus through serving others - the broken and lost. Faith is not simply an act of the mind, but as the blind man did an act of pursuing God.

 I have written before that for me 'obedience to Christ is faith'.

A note from Yujin:

Great discussion on prayer, brother Bill. If I might add a few thoughts... First, there is Hebrews 11:1, which may perhaps be the only place in the Bible where faith is defined:

Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

In that same chapter the nature of faith is described:

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him (Hebrews 11:6).

So then, faith means a confidence in an unseen hope. Christian faith involves believing in the existence and faithfulness of God.

Faith is God's channel to convey the benefits of salvation: "For by grace you have been saved through faith" (Ephesians 2:8). The quantity of faith is perhaps less important than the quality and object of faith. Jesus taught that even a mustard-seed-sized faith could remove mountains. And certainly no one was ever healed or saved just by believing, but it was believing in Jesus that faith was made effective. Finally, while there are various instances and kinds and expressions of faith, saving faith, along with every aspect of salvation, is a gift of God:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Again, in Romans 10:17 we learn that faith comes by way of hearing and hearing faith is given by God's decree:

 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Now, it is also important to know that it was not always the faith of the ones healed that was effective. If this were true, then how could the deaf mute and the dead be healed? Also, Jesus commended the faith of the four men that brought in the paralytic rather than the faith of the paralytic as the reason for the paralytic's healing. All these demonstrate that the most important aspect of faith is the quality and object of faith.

Friends, we come across the well-known incident, where a rich young man came and asked Jesus, "What shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?"

Some time ago I preached on this passage (parallels in Luke 18:18-30; Matthew 19:16-30). At the time, I argued that Jesus was saying that a person must surrender everything and follow Him to inherit eternal life. I also showed that even this surrendering of everything to Christ was insufficient to save because salvation is a work only possible by God. When I preached this message, it had a mixed response. Some said, "If I believe Jesus is my Lord and Savior, it would be nothing to surrender everything I have to Him." Others said, "Okay. If I sell everything I have today, what am I going to do tomorrow?" Both responses reveal the heart of the listeners.

Jesus often uses occasions like this to reveal the heart of the person asking the question. Following certain manuscripts the NKJV has in Mark 10:24 these words: "How hard it is for those who trust in riches to enter the kingdom of God!" The other translations, following other manuscripts, do not have this. But this little phrase clearly reflects the larger message of this incident, namely, those that would inherit eternal life must trust in Jesus Christ alone. Those that try to find justification in their riches, in their morality, in their wisdom, or anything else will always fall short. This is what the teacher of the law tried to do when he approached Jesus with the same question as this rich young man (Luke 10:25-37, especially verse 29). He wanted to justify himself, but Jesus showed him his shortcoming. In the parable of the Pharisee and the publican, Jesus taught this same lesson, namely, that those who tried to justify themselves would not be justified. When Paul writes of the failure of the Jews to be saved, he explains that it was because they trusted in their own righteousness rather than the righteousness provided by God in Christ (Romans 10:1-4). Just like all of these examples, so also here, Jesus revealed the heart of the rich young man as one that was self-justifying.

Jesus helped the young man to see in so many ways. Even when the young man first spoke, saying,  "Good teacher..." Jesus prodded him with a retort: "Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is God" (Mark 10:18). Did this young man understand that Jesus was God? Would he acknowledge Jesus as his Lord and Savior?

Jesus tests him with the Law of Moses, telling him to keep the commands. Remarkably, the young man says that he's kept all the commands since his youth. Presumptuous? Then Jesus tests him with a challenge that addresses the preeminent command, namely, "to love the LORD your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength." He tells him to sell everything, give to the poor, and follow Him. If the young man would recognize the authority of Jesus as God, he would do as He commands. But sadly, this challenge revealed that the heart of this young man was not open to trust Christ alone for his salvation.

Did you notice that when this young man went away, Jesus did not run after him to appeal to him further? Jesus did not try to water down His challenge by saying, "Just be willing to sell everything. I didn't mean for you to do it literally." Jesus did not try to persuade him with more arguments and stories. He let him go unsaved. Yet, I have often seen Christians almost pleading with non-believers to believe, as if the they might be saved through the sincerity or logic of their pleas. No, my friends, we may "water," we may "sow," but God alone causes the increase (1 Corinthians 3:6-7). Unless God has regenerated the heart of a person, they will never receive our message. Therefore, it is not our place to plead but only to proclaim, not to save but to testify. And the motivation for us to witness is not that we can save people but that God has commanded us to be witnesses. Just as people cannot justify themselves, neither can we justify anyone.

Some of you may wonder why the disciples were astonished when Jesus said it was hard for the rich to be saved. He even went so far as to say that it would be easier for a camel (perhaps "rope" in Aramaic) to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to be saved. The surprise was because the rich were considered blessed of God in that time. They were thought to be rich because they faithfully followed the Law of Moses. Therefore, if it was hard for the blessed of God, the faithful rich, to be saved, what hope was their for the rest of them?

Jesus says that while it is impossible for man, all things are possible with God (Mark 10:27). In other words, no one can justify themselves, but God can justify even the worst of sinners. It appears Peter grasped Jesus' meaning, as he says, "We have left all and followed You." And Jesus responds that those that have done so will gain eternal life in the age to come. On another occasion, when many "disciples" were abandoning Jesus because they could not accept His words, Peter reaffirmed his faith. Being asked of Jesus, "Do you want to leave too?" Peter replied, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life" (John 6:68).

Dear friends, let us understand this. The Gospel is this, that Jesus Christ died for our sins and rose again (1 Corinthians 15:1-5), and if we trust in Him alone, we will be saved and inherit eternal life. Simple, profound, and complete.

What if Jesus asked you today, "Sell everything you have, give it to the poor, and then go and preach my Name to a remote tribe in Africa?" How would you answer? Friends, I don't mean to offend your integrity. I know that many of you, like myself, would jump at the privilege and opportunity, because while we go through the motions in this life, nothing that we have here means anything to us compared to what is in store for us in heaven. But sometimes it is good to reflect on questions like this because it is easy to get so caught up in the daily grind, so into our gadgets, experiences, and ambitions, that we forget to keep an eternal perspective.

I read what Yujin wrote on divorce and i really liked it and learned alot.  God allowed divorce as a concession to people's sinfullness.  The Pharisees used Deuteronomy 24:1 as an excuse for divorce.  Jesus explained that this was not God's intent;  God wants married people to consider their marriage permenant.  The sacred vows say for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health,  till death do us part!  I think that is clear.  We need to have determination to stay married.  Never give up is not just in karate!

I would like to share with you something profound that John Piper preached on the matter of marriage, divorce and remarriage. It is in two parts. Though it is a bit long, it can give you a biblically sound understanding of these issues. His central passage comes from our reading.

Part I

Link to the video

Mark 10:1-12

And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again. And again, as was his custom, he taught them. 2 And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” 3 He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” 4 They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” 5 And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7 ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

As we come to the end of our series on marriage—this week and next week—it is fitting that we think together about the implications of the meaning of marriage for divorce and remarriage. For many of you who have walked through a divorce and are now single or remarried, or whose parents were divorced, or some other loved one, the mere mention of the word carries a huge weight of sorrow and loss and tragedy and disappointment and anger and regret and guilt. Few things are more painful than divorce. It cuts to the depths of personhood unlike any other relational gash. It is emotionally more heart-wrenching than the death of a spouse. Death is usually clean pain. Divorce is usually dirty pain. In other words, the enormous loss of a spouse in death is compounded in divorce by the ugliness of sin and moral outrage at being so wronged.

The Devastation of Divorce

It is often long years in coming, and long years in the settlement and in the adjustment. The upheaval of life is immeasurable. The sense of failure and guilt and fear can torture the soul. Like the psalmist, night after night a spouse falls asleep with tears (Psalm 6:6). Work performance is hindered. People don’t know how to relate to you any more and friends start to withdraw. You can feel like you wear a big scarlet D on your chest. The loneliness is not like the loneliness of being a widow or a widower or person who has never been married. It is in class by itself. (Which is one reason why so many divorced people find each other.) A sense of devastated future can be all consuming. Courtroom controversy compounds the personal misery. And then there is often the agonizing place of children. Parents hope against hope that the scars will not cripple the children or ruin their marriages some day. Tensions over custody and financial support deepen the wounds. And then the awkward and artificial visitation rights can lengthen the tragedy over decades. And add to all of this that it happens in America to over four out of every ten married couples.

Responding to Divorce

There are two ways to respond lovingly and caringly to this situation. One is to come alongside divorced persons and stand by them as they grieve and repent of any sinful part of their own. And then to stay by them through the transitions and help them find a way to enjoy the forgiveness and the strength for new obedience that Christ obtained when he died and rose again.

The other way to respond lovingly and caringly is to articulate a hatred of divorce, and why it is against the will of God, and do all we can biblically to keep it from happening. Compromises on the sacredness and life-long permanence of marriage—positions that weaken the solidity of the covenant-union—may feel loving in the short run, but wreak havoc over the decades. Preserving the solid framework of the marriage covenant with high standards may feel tough in the short run, but produces ten thousand blessings for future generations. I hope that both of these ways of loving and caring will flourish at Bethlehem.

The Covenant Remains till Christ Removes

One of the reasons that I have emphasized the ultimate meaning of marriage so much in this series is that the meaning of marriage is such that human beings cannot legitimately break it. The ultimate meaning of marriage is the representation of the covenant keeping love between Christ and his church. To live this truth and to show this truth is what it means, most deeply, to be married. This is the ultimate reason why marriage exists. There are other reasons, but this is the main one. Therefore, if Christ ever abandons and discards his church, then a man may divorce his wife. And if the blood-bought church, under the new covenant, ever ceases to be the bride of Christ, then a wife may legitimately divorce her husband. But as long as Christ keeps his covenant with his bride, the church, and as long as the church, by the sustaining grace of God, remains the chosen people of Jesus Christ, then the very meaning of marriage will include: What God has joined, only God can separate, not man.

Getting Serious about Sacredness

O how I pray that one of the effects of this series will be to make us as a people profoundly serious about the sacredness of marriage. The world treats this diamond like just another stone. But in fact, marriage is sacred beyond what most people imagine. It is a unique creation of God, a dramatic portrayal of God’s relation to his people, and a display of the glory of God’s covenant keeping love. Against all the diminished attitudes about marriage in the world—Jesus’ world and our world—Jesus’ words about marriage are breathtaking. This is the work of God, not man, and it does not lie in man’s prerogative to end it.

Jesus Knows His Moses

In our text in Mark 10:1ff., the Pharisees came to Jesus and asked him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” That’s the question. Today, people don’t even ask the question. It is assumed. It’s not only lawful, but easy and cheap. Just Google the word “divorce” and see what you get (“Easy Online Divorce,” “Simple Divorce Online,” “No Fault Divorce, $28.95,” “Easy Online Divorce, $299”). Let me say cautiously and seriously: Those who scorn the design of God and the glory of Christ, and build their lives and businesses and whole industries around making divorce cheap and easy are under the wrath of God, and need to repent and seek his forgiveness through Christ before it is too late.

Jesus knew that the Pharisees in general were an adulterous generation (Matthew 12:39). He knew how they defended their divorces. So he lead them to that very place and asks them in Mark 10:3, “What did Moses command you?” He takes them to Moses. But they should be careful here. Moses didn’t just write Deuteronomy, which they are about to quote. He also wrote Genesis. Verse 4: They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” That’s true. It’s a reference to Deuteronomy 24:1.

What will Jesus say in response to this defense of divorce? Verse 5: Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment.” This is amazing. It implies, in other words, there are laws in the Old Testament that are not expressions of God’s will for all time, but expressions of how best to manage sin in a particular people at a particular time. Divorce is never commanded and never instituted in the Old Testament. But it was permitted and regulated. Like polygamy was permitted and regulated, and certain kinds of slavery were permitted and regulated. And Jesus says here that this permission was not a reflection of God’s ideal for his people; it was a reflection of the hardness of the human heart. “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment.”

Back to Creation

Then Jesus takes the Pharisees (and us) back to God’s will in creation and quotes Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 and shows us the way it was supposed to be. Verses 6-8: “But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’” That’s the end of his Scripture quoting. Now the question is: What will he do with it? Clearly Jesus sees a tension between Deuteronomy 24 and Genesis 1 and 2. The but at the beginning of verse 6 (“But from the beginning of creation . . .) means: God’s will about divorce in Genesis 1-2 is not the same as his will expressed in Deuteronomy 24.

So the question is: Which way will Jesus go? Will he say: Well, there is still hardness of heart today, even in my disciples, and so Deuteronomy expresses God’s will for Christians today? Or will he say, I am the Messiah, the Christ. The Son of Man has come into the world to gather a people who by faith in him and union with him display the true meaning of marriage in the way they keep their marriage covenant? Will the emphasis fall on the fact that in the church there is still hardness of heart, or will the emphasis fall on the fact that the old has passed away and the new has come (2 Corinthians 5:17)?

Jesus’ Three Conclusions

Jesus draws three conclusions in verse 8b and verse 9. He says (1) in verse 8b, “So they are no longer two but one flesh.” In other words, since God said in Genesis 2:24, “The two shall become one flesh,” therefore Jesus concludes for his day and ours: “So they are no longer two but one flesh.” Marriage is that kind of union—very profound, just as Christ and the church are one body (Romans 12:5).

Then (2) the second conclusion Jesus draws is that this union of one flesh is the creation, the work, of God, not man. He says in verse 9, “What therefore God has joined together . . .” So even though two humans decide to get married. And a human pastor or priest or justice of the peace or some other person solemnizes and legalizes the union, all that is secondary to the main actor, namely, God. “What God has joined together . . .” God is the main actor in the event of marriage.

Then (3) Jesus draws the conclusion at the end of verse 9: “Let not man separate.” The word translated “man” here (“Let not man separate”) is not the word for male over against female, but the word for human over against divine. The contrast is: “If God joined the man and woman in marriage, then mere humans have no right to separate what he joined. That’s Jesus third conclusion from Genesis 1 and 2. Since God created this sacred union with this sacred purpose to display the unbreakable firmness of his covenant love for his people, it simply does not lie within man’s rights to destroy what God created.

Finished with the Pharisees

That’s the end of the Jesus’ conversation with the Pharisees about divorce. He has more to say to his disciples, but he is done with the Pharisees. They ask no more. He tells no more. They came with their question. Jesus gave his answer. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” And Jesus answers: “What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” No. It is not lawful. It contradicts the ultimate meaning of marriage.

Of course, someone might say, it has always contradicted the meaning of marriage—even when the permission of Deuteronomy was written. But Jesus is not thinking that way. He is calling his followers to a higher standard than the compromise with hardness of heart in Deuteronomy.

Jesus Didn’t Come to Reaffirm Moses

Jesus did not come to simply affirm the Mosaic law. He came to fulfill it in his own consuming, forgiving, justifying obedience and death, and then to take his ransomed and forgiven and justified followers into the higher standards that were really intended when all of Moses is properly understood. Remember Matthew 5:17, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” And then he gives six examples of what this radical obedience will look like in his disciples. Here are just two: 1) “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder . . . but I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment” (Matthew 5:21-22). 2) “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart’” (Matthew 5:27-28). And there are four more like this in Matthew 5.

Jesus Came to Fulfill Moses

In other words, Jesus came not only to fulfill the law in his own work, he came to take his people to a radical understanding of the law and a radical obedience to the law that is not based on law but on himself, and therefore reflects the fullness of what God wills for us—and especially reflects the gospel, the covenant-keeping work of Christ at Calvary for his church. Marriage among Christians is mainly meant to tell the truth about the gospel—that Christ dies for his church who loves him, and never breaks his covenant with his bride.

In essence, Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You are permitted to divorce.’ But I say to you, ‘I have come to conquer the hardness of your heart. I have come to die for your sins. I have come to count you as righteous. I have come to show you the drama that marriage was meant to represent in my sacrificial, covenant-keeping love for my sinful bride. I have come to give you the power to stay married, or to stay single, so that either way you keep your promises and show what my covenant is like, and how sacred is the covenant bond of marriage.”

So when the Pharisees are gone and Jesus is in the house with his disciples, he puts the matter even more bluntly and more radically. Mark 10:10-12: “And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. And he said to them, ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.’”

For Next Week

Mark does not report how stunned the disciples were at these words; Matthew does. I will try to show more fully from two important passages in Matthew (5:32; 19:9) and three in 1 Corinthians (7:10-11, 12-16, 39) and one in Romans (7:1-3) why I think we should take Jesus at face value here, and counsel against all remarriage after divorce while the spouse is living. That’s what I think Jesus calls us to as his followers. Keep your marriage vows in such a way as to tell the truth about the unbreakable covenant love of Christ.

Divorce and the Gospel

But in closing today I want to emphasize that what Jesus says here in verses 10-12 is incredibly good news—even to those who have been divorced and are remarried. Here’s why: Jesus says, Don’t divorce your spouse and marry someone else. If you do, you’ve committed adultery. Why is it adultery? Ultimately, it is adultery because it betrays the truth about Christ that marriage is meant to display. Jesus never, never, never does that to his bride, the church. He never forsakes her. He never abandons her. He never abuses her. He always loves her. He always takes her back when she wanders. He always is patient with her. He always cares for her and provides for her and protects her and, wonder of wonders, delights in her. And you—you who are married once, married five times, married never—if you repent and trust Christ—receive him as the treasure who bore your punishment and became your righteousness—you are in the bride. And that is how he relates to you. “Everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sin’s through his name (Acts 10:43).

The radical call of Jesus never to divorce and remarry is a declaration of the gospel by which people who have failed may be saved. If Christ were not this way, we would all be undone. But this is how true, how faithful, how forgiving he is. Therefore, we are saved.

-----------------------

Part II

Link to the video

Matthew 19:3-12

And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” 8 He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” 10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” 11 But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.

I said last time that there are two ways to be compassionate and caring in relation to divorce—not at all meaning that you choose between them, but that we must pursue both. One is to come along side divorced persons while they grieve and (wherever necessary) repent, and to stay by them through the painful transitions, and to fold them into our lives, and to help them find a way to enjoy the forgiveness and the strength for new kinds of obedience that Christ has already obtained for them when he died and rose again. That’s one way to love. And I pray we will all pursue it. The other way to respond with care and compassion is to articulate a hatred for divorce, and why it is against the will of God, and to do all we can biblically to keep it from happening.

Keeping an Eternal Perspective

One of the reasons in the past few weeks that I preached twice on the dignity and worth and Christ-exalting potential of singleness is because I know that divorce throws thousands of people into that situation, many of them against their will. If we are going to stand for marriage as the life-long commitment to one living spouse, then we must be prepared to love single, divorced people with all our hearts and homes and families. And we must keep a clear, biblical, eternal perspective, and remind ourselves repeatedly that compared to eternal life with God, this earthly life—single or married, divorced or not—is very short. James says, “You are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes” (James 4:14). If a person is going to remain single to honor his or her marriage vows, that perspective will be crucial.

God Makes and God Breaks

Last week I took the stand that if the most ultimate meaning of marriage is to represent the unbreakable covenant-love between Christ and his church (Ephesians 5:22-33), then no human being has a right to break a marriage covenant. When the impossible day comes that Christ breaks his vow, “I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20), then, on that day, a human being may break his marriage covenant. This explains why Jesus does not settle for the divorce provision of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Mark 10:3-9), but says, “What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate” (Mark 10:9). In other words, since God is the one who decisively makes every marriage, only God has the right to break a marriage. And he does it by death. Which is why the traditional and biblical marriage vows have one and only one limitation: “till death do us part,” or, “as long as we both shall live.”

Four Crucial Questions

As you know, when a person takes such a stand on the inviolability and sacredness of marriage, and the illegitimacy of divorce and remarriage while the spouses are alive, there are many questions, both biblical and practical, that have to be answered. So what I want to do in this message is to try to answer some of the more pressing ones.

1. First, does death end a marriage in such a way that it is legitimate for a spouse to remarry?

The answer is yes, and no one has seriously questioned it. One key text is Romans 7:1-3:

Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress. (See below on 1 Corinthians 7:39)

In other words, Paul says that to divorce and remarry while your spouse is living is adulterous, but to remarry after the death of a spouse is not. I think the reason for this is that Jesus made plain that in the resurrection there is no marriage (Matthew 22:30). So if a person said it was wrong to remarry after the death of a spouse, it would seem to imply that marriage is meant to be valid beyond death and in the resurrection. But it’s not. Death is the decisive and eternal end of marriage. The spouse who has died has moved out of the earthly sphere where marriage happens, and is no longer married. And therefore the spouse on earth is no longer married. Therefore remarriage after the death of a spouse is not only legitimate, but speaks a clear biblical truth—after death there is no marriage.

2. Second, if a divorced person has already married again, should he or she leave the later marriage?

The reason this question comes with such force is that Jesus speaks of the second marriage as committing adultery. Luke 16:18, “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.”

My answer is that remarriage, while a divorced spouse is still living, is an act of unfaithfulness to the marriage covenant. In that sense, to remarry is adultery. We promised, “till death do us part” because that is what God says marriage is, and even if our spouse breaks his or her covenant vows, we will not break ours.

But I do not think that a person who remarries against God’s will, and thus commits adultery in this way, should later break the second marriage. The marriage should not have been done, but now that it is done, it should not be undone by man. It is a real marriage. Real vows have been made and sexual union has happened. And that real covenant of marriage may be purified by the blood of Jesus and set apart for God. In other words, I don’t think that a couple who repents and seeks God’s forgiveness, and receives his cleansing, should think of their lives as ongoing adultery, even though, in the eyes of Jesus, that’s how the relationship started.

There are several reasons for why I believe this:

1) First, back in Deuteronomy 24:1-4, where the permission for divorce was given in the law of Moses, it speaks of the divorced woman being “defiled” in the second marriage so that it would be an abomination for her to return to her first husband, even if her second husband died. This language of defilement is similar to Jesus’ language of adultery. And yet the second marriage stood. It was defiling in some sense, yet it was valid.

2) Another reason I think remarried couples should stay together is that when Jesus met the woman of Samaria, he said to her, “You have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband” (John 4:18). When Jesus says, “The one you have now is not your husband,” he seems to imply that the other five were. Not that it’s right to divorce and marry five times. But the way Jesus speaks of it, it sounds as though he saw them as real marriages. Illicit. Adulterous to enter into, but real. Valid.

3) And the third reason I think remarried couples should stay together is that even vows that should not be made, once they are made, should generally be kept. I don’t want to make that absolute, but there are passages in the Bible that speak of vows being made that should not have been made, but were right to keep (like Joshua’s vow to the Gibeonites in Joshua 9). God puts a very high value on keeping our word, even where it gets us in trouble (“[The godly man] swears to his own hurt and does not change,” Psalm 15:4). In other words, it would have been more in keeping with God’s revealed will not to remarry, but adding the sin of another covenant breaking does not please God more.¹

There are marriages in this church that are second marriages for one or both partners which, in my view should not have happened, and are today godly marriages—marriages which are clean and holy, and in which forgiven, justified husbands and wives please God by the way they relate to each other. As forgiven, cleansed, Spirit-led followers of Jesus, they are not committing adultery in their marriage. It began as it should not have, and has become holy.

3. Third, if an unbelieving spouse insists on leaving a believing spouse, what should the believing spouse do?

Paul’s answer in 1 Corinthians 7:12-16 goes like this:

To the rest I say (I, not the Lord [which I think means, I don’t have a specific command from the historical teachings of Jesus, but I am led by his Spirit]) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. [Which I take to mean that marriage is such a holy union in God’s eyes that a believer, a child of God, is not defiled by having sexual relations with an enemy of the cross; and the children are not born with any kind of special contamination because the father or mother is an enemy of Christ. They’re not saved by being married to a believer or born to a believer, but they are set apart for proper and holy use in the marriage.]² But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?

So the answer of this passage is that if divorce is forced on a believer by an unbeliever, the believer should not make war on the unbeliever to make the unbeliever stay. The reason Paul gives for this is in verse 15b, “God has called you to peace.” I do not believe this text teaches that we are free to remarry when this happens. Some take the words, “In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved,” to mean: “is free to remarry.”

There are several reasons why I don’t think it means that:

1) When Paul says in verse 15, “In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved (or bound),” I think he means, “not enslaved to stay married when the unbeliever over time insists on leaving and sues for divorce.” He’s not saying, “The brother or sister is not enslaved to stay single—and thus free to remarry,” because Paul, the lover of singleness, would not have spoken of singleness as a state of slavery or bondage. It is very unlikely Paul would talk like that.

2) The second reason I don’t think he is saying the abandoned spouse is free to remarry is that he just pointed us in the opposite direction in verses 10-11, “To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife.” With a statement like that in front of me (“if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband”), I am not inclined to think Paul is supporting remarriage four verses later.

3) The third reason I don’t think he is supporting remarriage when he says, “the brother or sister is not bound,” is that Paul’s argument in the next verse (v. 16) doesn’t support that. It supports freedom to accept divorce peacefully, not freedom to remarry. Verse 16 says, “For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” In other words, you don’t know, and therefore you can’t use that as an argument to create an ugly fight to stay married. So the words in verse 15, “In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved,” mean you are not enslaved to this marriage when your unbelieving spouse demands out, because you have no assurance that fighting to stay in will save him.

4) And a fourth reason for believing Paul upholds Jesus’ ideal of no remarriage after divorce while the estranged spouse is alive is verse 39: “A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.” So it seems to me that Paul and Jesus are of one mind that followers of Jesus are radically devoted to one husband and one wife as long as they both shall live. This ideal tells the gospel truth most clearly: Christ died for his bride and never forsakes her.

4. Fourth, the last question we barely have time for is: Are there no exceptions to the prohibition of remarriage while the spouse is living?

My answer is no. But I am very much in the minority of biblical students, and even among Bible-believing scholars and pastors. So let’s turn very briefly to Matthew 19 to see the main argument for the exception of adultery—that is, the argument that when there has been adultery against a spouse he or she is free to divorce and remarry. Matthew 19:3-12 is very much like the words of Jesus we saw last week in Mark 10:1-12. There are two main differences. The first one is in verse 9 where there is an exception clause: “And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” Most scholars say that the words “except for sexual immorality” mean that if there has been adultery, the aggrieved spouse is free to divorce and remarry.

Piper’s Position

I don’t think that is what Jesus meant. There is no time to give the fairly involved explanation why. For that I refer you to Divorce & Remarriage: A Position Paper. In a few sentences, since Jesus does not use the word “adultery” here (when he says “except for sexual immorality”), which he uses elsewhere (15:9) in distinction to this word, but instead uses the word typically referring to “fornication” (see especially John 8:41), I think what Jesus is doing is warning his readers that this absolute prohibition against remarriage does not apply to the situation of betrothal, where fornication may have happened.

Matthew is the one gospel that tells about Joseph’s intention to “divorce” his betrothed Mary because he thought she had committed fornication. And Matthew says that Joseph was “just” in doing this, not adulterous: “being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly” (Matthew 1:19). Matthew is telling us that Jesus’ warning that remarriage is adulterous does not apply to Joseph’s kind of situation.

Bethlehem’s Position

This view is not widely held. And not all the elders at Bethlehem over the years have shared this conviction. That is why we do not make my own understanding the standard for church discipline, but rather a standard we can all agree on. This elder position is found in the paper called A Statement on Divorce & Remarriage in the Life of Bethlehem Baptist Church.

So the view that I have been explaining and trying to show from scripture for the last two weeks is mine and does not represent the official position of our church in all its details. The elders all agree that marriage, as God designed it, is vastly more serious and sacred than our culture makes it out to be. And we agree that, if there is any biblical grounds for divorce and remarriage, the grounds are only unrepentant adultery and protracted desertion. As with other matters, we live with each other in peace, in spite of this disagreement.

Our united prayer for the people of Bethlehem and those that we care about outside, is that we all recognize the deepest and highest meaning of marriage—not sexual intimacy, as good as that is, not friendship, as good as that is, not mutual helpfulness, as good as that is, not childbearing and childrearing, as good as that is, but the flesh-and-blood display in the world of the covenant-keeping love between Christ and his church. That is what we call you to. Display that. Tell the truth about that in your marriages and your singleness.

Keeping Covenant Through the Gospel

And we believe that through the gospel God gives us the power we need to love each other in this covenant-keeping way, because in Matthew 19:11, after his radical call to faithfulness, Jesus said, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given.” And it is given to those who follow Christ. We are not left alone. He is with us to help us. If we have been sinned against, he will make it right sooner or later. And give us the grace to flourish while we wait. And if we have sinned, he will give the grace to repent and receive forgiveness and move forward in radical new obedience.

The gospel of Christ crucified for our sins is the foundation of our lives. Marriage exists to display it. And when marriage breaks down, the gospel is there to forgive and heal and sustain until he comes, or until he calls.