Q:   The man I married was married before. He divorced for reasons other than adultery; they simply did not get along. After being married to him, I studied the Bible and realized my marriage was not a lawful marriage. I have divorced him for that reason. Am I able to marry again? It is my understanding that he is still bound to his first wife and will be until she dies.

A:   There is hardly a more sensitive doctrinal issue in the church today than this. This is a matter that often involves us at our core being. Your conviction is rare, and you are to be commended for recognizing the need to put away your husband who had been wrongly divorced. It is such a great source of encouragement to see people like you who take a difficult stand for what is right. What a wonderful example this is to others struggling to follow God's ways. We will offer now a response to your question.

In the discussion to follow, we may speak specifically of a husband's right to put away his wife. We should keep in mind, however, that God's law in this matter for one gender applies to the other. Mark's account of Jesus' teaching on the matter makes this clear, as the instruction pertaining to the man in Mark 10:11 is repeated for the woman in verse 12. The legitimate extension of this is that whatever is fair for the goose is fair for the gander.

First, it is noteworthy that you are using terminology that is completely consistent with scripture. A review of the terminology will be very helpful now. To understand God's law, we must know the meaning and extent of application of the words employed.

On one hand, note the actions of men and women and the associated language. In society, men and women marry and divorce one another at will. As you are well aware, they do not always have the liberty by divine law to marry or divorce, but they do it anyway. It is essential to note that even though they marry or divorce without God's approval, God still recognizes that they are so married or divorced. For example, in the case of an unlawful marriage, note that Mark by inspiration states that, though Herod had no right to the wife he had taken, still, "he had married her" (Mark 6:17). Likewise, in Matthew 5 and 19, Mark 10, and Luke 16, "marry" is the word Jesus uses even for an unlawful, adulterous union. Therefore, a person is really, actually, and truly married, even if the union is contrary to divine law. Likewise, a person is really, actually, and truly divorced, even if it is contrary to divine law. To summarize, if a woman is married to a man to whom she has no right, she still is married. The fact that God does not approve of the marriage does not mean that she is not actually married. If she divorces this man, she is still a divorced woman, even though God did not approve of the marriage in the first place.

On the other hand, note the actions of God and the associated language. People may marry and divorce, but, in scripture, what God does is termed "binding" and "loosing" (or "releasing" or "discharging," depending on the translation). It is important to note that God's loosing may or may not coincide with man's divorcing. Note the following passage of which you are already obviously aware: "For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband" - Romans 7:2. As you know, the only exception to this is revealed in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 where a man has the divine right to put away his wife if she is known to be guilty of fornication. Moreover, he can remarry without committing adultery, which necessarily infers that God released him from the law of his former wife. However, the put-away wife has not this right to remarry without committing adultery, which necessarily infers that God has NOT released her from the law of her former husband.

This is so important we want to clearly state it again all by itself: The only reason that a married man can put away his wife and remarry another without committing adultery is if and only if the cause of the putting away was her fornication. This is established in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, and we dare not act beyond this ordinance.

Concerning divorce, God's law tells us not to do it. When a man and woman are lawfully joined in a non-adulterous union, one is not to put the other away (Matthew 19:6, 1 Corinthians 7:10-14). Therefore, if people put away one another for no just cause, they sin, being in violation of God's law. If they remarry, they sin again, being adulterers. Notwithstanding, there are two cases which scripture indicates would be an exception, that is, where God would allow putting away. The first would be if a man were married to one to whom he had no lawful right. Repentance would actually require that he puts away that adulterous relationship, as would have been required of Herod, or the adulterer in Corinth (1 Corinthians 5:1). The second would be if a man came to know that his lawful wife committed fornication, he would have the right to put her away (Matthew 19:9) or the right to reconcile with her (1 Corinthians 7:11). It is of utmost importance to note that only in this second case of putting away does scripture allow remarriage without committing adultery for the one (Matthew 5:32 and 19:9).

We may be tempted by our emotions to complain that this is not fair. For example, if a man marries a woman to whom he has no right but does it ignorantly, should he be prevented from remarrying another after dissolving that relationship which God had not condoned in the first place? However, consider the following reasoning and see if it makes sense. A certain woman marries five different men and consecutively divorces each one. However, to each one, she had no divinely lawful right for marriage. Another woman also marries five different men and consecutively divorces each one. However, only to the first husband did she have a divinely lawful right to marry, but she divorced him without scriptural cause. Now both women are contemplating remarriage again. Should the first woman who was an adulteress five out of five times be awarded the right to lawfully remarry simply because she had no right to any of her husbands in the first place? If so, then the second woman, clearly not having a right to remarry, is punished because one of her marriages was non-adulterous. If this is true, she would have been better off in the long run if she had been an adulteress in all five marriages. Now there's something that does not seem fair. Whenever our understanding of God's law presents a situation where more sinfulness gives one an advantage, we have obviously misunderstood God's law.

If we will stay away from emotionalism and accept God's law for what is fair without bias, we will be eternally rewarded. Nothing in this life is worth sacrificing heaven for.

In the efforts of a thorough examination, we have considered various viewpoints on the subject. We have not meant to suggest that any of these viewpoints would actually be yours. These are simply ideas that are commonly heard, and it is expedient to address them. We trust that you will continue to act according to your convictions and according to truth. We commend you again for your faith, and we encourage you to continue no matter the cost. Above all, we praise God for the power of His word to change our lives and for His love to forgive, demonstrated by the gift of His Son upon the cross. Thank you for asking such a question that would provoke our hearts toward the will of God.