Why Does God Hate Divorce? A Fresh Look at Malachi 2:10

For the Lord, the God of Israel, says that He hates divorce

-Malachi 2:16a

Netflix is currently running a docuseries titled, "Death of a Pastor's Wife."   This isn't a review of the program, but suffice to say it's unintentionally a good docuseries on just about everything wrong in what is called Evangelical Christianity (with which I identify). It's also good case study of the disease we've looked at  from several different angles which I call the clergy/laity system.

In the Netflix docuseries, the sick and demented pastor, John Paul Miller, after cheating (committing adultery) on his first wife, getting a divorce (don't miss that) so he could marry the worship leader (who also committed adultery and then got a divorce so she could marry JP, don't miss that) who was much younger, abuses and cheats on this second wife as well. Feel free to watch the series and be disgusted with him on your own.

The modern Christian reasoning the second wife uses to stay in the abusive and sick second marriage is also a disease that seems to permeate all of Christendom. That is, she does what most of Christianity does and builds her theology on selected verses taken out of context. It's sad to watch because she really wants to do the right thing. Unfortunately, she was able to be manipulated because of her failure to "rightly divide the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15). A review of all the common theological errors of just about everyone in this series would require multiple blog entries. So, let me limit this to our verse above and the pastor's abuse of it.  

[Note: although this entry focuses on what I believe are gross blind spots and bad interpretation within Evangelical Christianity, the enormous Catholic Church has no room to boast as its threat of eternal damnation for the "grave sin" of divorce (without the very expensive annulment approval of the CC) is probably far worse in terms of abuse.] 

The pastor in the series (although divorced himself as noted) text bombs his second wife (remember, she was also already once divorced after an adulterous affair with the pastor) screeching at her and asking why she would do something "God hates." He is, of course, referring to Malachi 2:16 (quoted above).

But what exactly does God hate in that chapter and why does God hate divorce in general? We will look at the context of the verse in the Book of Malachi, but first let's look at the Lord's words in Matthew that also need examination in context (rightly divided). 

But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality...

-Matthew 19:9a

Just on its surface, this verse is telling us of at least one reason for "divorce" (we will look at that word shortly). When we pull half of verse 2:16 out of its context in Malachi, we are left with the idea that God just hates divorce for the sake of hating divorce. Of course, God allows divorce for several violations of the Hebrew/Jewish marriage covenant (such as we shall see when we examine Matthew 19:9 more closely). God allows that which he "hates?" Yes. And that makes perfect sense when taken in the context of the verse in question. 

Let's start by reading the address on the envelope.

The oracle of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi.

-Malachi 1:1

The harsh words of this book are to God's chosen nation, Israel. His beloved. The apple of His eye. We need to mark some things because of that. First we note, as we are taught, that all scripture is profitable (2 Tim 3:16). So there is something for our learning in this book, but there is a difference between that which is for us and that which is to us. Malachi was prophesying to Israel. Not to us, not even to gentiles in his own day (unless he specifically notes them). As we shall see, Malachi (and God) is concerned with the covenant God had with the fathers (Israel's fathers). 

Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? Why do we deal treacherously with one another, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?

-Malachi 2:10

God did not make the Sinai covenant with Adam, Noah or even Abraham (who was justified in a state of uncircumcision, Romans 4:9-12). He does not have that covenant with us in this age. The First Covenant is expressly and specifically with Israel alone (Ex 20:5-9).

We are not in covenant relationship with God in this age, but we must leave that there (we have covered this elsewhere). We will note again that while not directly to us, these things in the prophets are for our learning. We learn about the character of God and what he hates. We can certainly profit from understanding such things.

We also see in this one verse (in addition to the reference to the covenant) God's charge against his own people. They have dealt "treacherously" with one another. This is among his own people. We cannot make this "unbelievers" as those who teach Replacement Theology must do. If the "church" is Israel, the application here would have to be the "church." But we do not need that false application to understand God's anger here. And we never forget that this is all part of the reasoning for God hating divorce.

Treacherously is translated from the Hebrew word, "bâgad." We have the idea here of dealing deceitfully (Strong's Hebrew Definitions). The word also carries the idea of covering something with a garment (ibid). We can see the relation. Something that is hidden. When we deal deceitfully we are hiding both the truth and our own intentions. This is the overarching charge God has against his chosen people.

 

Judah has dealt treacherously, and an abomination has been committed in Israel and Jerusalem. For Judah has profaned the sanctuary of the Lord, which He loves, and has married the daughter of a foreign god. May the Lord cut off from the tents of Jacob any descendant of the man who does this, teacher and student, yet who brings an offering to the Lord of Hosts.

-Malachi 2:11-12

Here the charge is centered on Judah and Jerusalem (try cramming "church" in there). This is not a study on the entire Book of Malachi, but I think it is helpful to know the setting here. Malachi is prophesying to a post-Babylonian captivity people during the time of the Second Temple (~400 BC). The nation was being rededicated after Nehemiah's request to return to Judah and rebuild had been granted (Neh 2:5-8). We are near the end of the inspired Hebrew Canon. To be sure, I do not know my Hebrew prophets as well as I should or hope to, but the big picture is clear.

Since I've mentioned his prophecy, just a quick reference to Nehemiah 13.

On that day they read aloud from the Book of Moses in the hearing of the people. In it there was found written that no Ammonite or Moabite should ever enter the congregation of God, because they did not meet the children of Israel with bread and water, but hired Balaam to curse them. However, our God turned the curse into a blessing. When they heard the Law, they separated from Israel all the racially mixed.

-Nehemiah 13:1-3

There is absolutely no room here for some sort of church-Israel connection. There is no room under the Old/First Covenant that one's race would be the marker of "salvation" (as we commonly use the word). When we rightly divide, we can see God's plans for the nation in his greater plan for the earth. We know those outside Israel could have resurrection life while simultaneously being excluded from the blessings specific to Israel's calling in the First Covenant to be a holy nation of priests (Ex 20:5-9). 

This begs the question, "priests for whom?" And the answer is, priests for the nations in a future earthly kingdom. For that to happen, Israel needs yet to be winnowed and cleansed. But rest assured it will happen one day under the Second Covenant. But, again, we must leave that there. We just acknowledge that we can in no way insert a "church" with a heavenly hope into these prophecies and passages. Again, there is more than one "church" in scripture.

This is the second thing you do: You cover the altar of the Lord with tears, with weeping and crying out, because He no longer regards the offering, nor receives it with good will from your hand. Yet you say, “Why?” It is because the Lord has been a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously. Yet she is your companion and your wife by covenant.

-Malachi 2:13-14

Would we ever say to any believer of what men today call the "church" that his/her offering is received or rejected of the Lord? All men have already been reconciled to God through the single and perfect offering of Christ (2 Cor 5). Now, not all men are thus redeemed, faith is necessary for that (Rom 4:9-16, etc.). God is reconciled to all men from his side through Christ, but men must individually be reconciled to God by faith (2 Cor 5). 

Verse 14 tells us why Israel, as a nation, is being judged and why she is having her offerings rejected. We've already seen that Judah has dealt deceitfully and has profaned the covenant the nation had with God. But now the Lord brings a specific accusation: the treachery against their wives.

Since Adam, God has used the marriage and unity of one man and one woman as his template and his picture. In this section of Malachi we see God equating Israel's idolatry and deceitfulness with him with deceitfulness in the marriage covenant. Just as Moses striking the rock the second time ruined the picture of the single striking of Christ (once for all), so does treachery in marriage ruin the picture of God's care and  oneness with his own. 

The second striking of the rock was so offensive to God's picture of the provision in the single offering of Christ that Moses was forbidden to step into the blessings in the promised land. Moses, yes the great man of faith Moses, lost an inheritance and is a picture and warning to all. Moses did not lose his free gift of resurrection life. He did not lose the blessings he will enjoy in a future earthly kingdom in Israel, but he did lose the joy of leading Israel into the land.

Moses and Aaron gathered the assembly before the rock, and he said to them, “Hear now, you rebels. Will we bring out water from this rock for you?” And Moses lifted up his hand, and he struck the rock twice with his rod, and plenty of water came out, and the assembly drank, and their livestock. The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, “Because you did not believe in Me, to sanctify Me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you will not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them.”

-Numbers 20:10-12

God is very protective of his pictures (types). This is another reason we must be very careful in handling God's word and in rightly dividing it properly. 

God loves his own. Dealing treacherously in a marriage covenant hurts both God's picture of his relationship to his people and it hurts his people. We should start to see what it is God "hates." 

 

Did He not make them one, having a remnant of the Spirit? And why one? He seeks godly offspring. So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously. For the Lord, the God of Israel, says that He hates divorce; for it covers one’s garment with violence, says the Lord of Hosts. Therefore take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.

-Malachi 2:15-16

 

God hates divorce because it is the end result of treachery and a distortion of his design. 

Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked, says the Lord God, but rather that he should turn from his ways and live?

-Ezekiel 18:23

God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Is that because prefers they stay alive in their wickedness? Of course not! He would rather have seen them turn from the way of death unto the way of life. Death is the end for the unbeliever (not entering some sadistic torture chamber of God's as most of Christendom teaches). It is the end of any hope of reconciliation with God. In the great resurrection chapter, death is spoken of as our "enemy" (1 Cor 15:26). Resurrection is the undoing of death and the power of the gates of Hades (i.e. the grave). 

All of that hope is lost in the death of the wicked. They surely deserve death (as we all do because of our own sin and our sin in Adam). But in death all hope is gone. This is similar to why God hates divorce. It is not the act of divorce itself that God hates (unless abused), it is that which leads to divorce. It is the deceitfulness that God hates. 

• sexual immorality
• adultery
• abuse (physical or emotional)
• lack of provision
• lack of affection

These are the things that destroy a marriage. These are the sins and failings that lead to divorce. God has allowed death (our enemy) to keep us from being trapped in this earthly body of decay and sin. God has allowed divorce (which he hates) to free the abused from the bondage of a treacherous spouse.

Where is the deceit? The deceit is in the denial of the vow. Let's look again at verse 16.

For the Lord, the God of Israel, says that He hates divorce; for it covers one’s garment with violence, says the Lord of Hosts. Therefore take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.

The "spirit" refers to the life God has given you. For us, we need to take heed to our new nature in Christ. No use telling the lost man to look to his carnal nature to find what he needs. The redeemed must recognize that while we do have a new spirit (nature) from God, we still have an old nature. We must learn to walk in the new nature (the newness of life). If we walk in the lust of the flesh, horrific sins against marriage will manifest. Remember, the wicked sins of 1 Corinthians 5 and 6,are charged against believers. It does not hurt to continually be reminded that we must recognize that we have both an old nature and a new nature, and learn to walk in the new. 

just as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with Him in the likeness of His death, so shall we also be united with Him in the likeness of His resurrection,

-Romans 6:4-5 

I say then, walk in the spirit [new nature], and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.

-Galatians 5:16 

And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the age of this world and according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, among them we all also once lived in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and we were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in sins, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and He raised us up and seated us together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not of yourselves. It is the gift of God, not of works, so that no one should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, so that we should walk in them.

-Ephesians 2:1-10

We must now turn to a dispensational distinction Paul gives us regarding divorce. In the Acts age, when Gentiles were grafted-in for the stated purpose of making a real, live, relevant Israel jealous (not to make "the church" jealous, Rom 10:19; 11:11,14). Paul, in the Book of Romans, is addressing grafted-in Gentiles in the context of his teachings on the last days and the expected return of the Lord to establish his Kingdom in Israel (Acts 1; Acts 3, etc.). The message of that age was still "to the Jew first." It is focused on God's plan for the earth.

We have covered this elsewhere, but just as the Lord in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24-25) spoke of the burden of children in the tribulation ahead for Israel, so does Paul warn of this burden because "the time is short" in 1 Cor 7. In that chapter, Paul teaches that it is best not to marry (he will seemingly contradict this in 1 Timothy 5, only if we fail to rightly divided the dispensations) and to not have children. But for those who cannot control themselves or who are already married, Paul upholds the sanctity of marriage.

In the midst of those instructions and the honoring of marriage, Paul says something that would be strange to someone in Israel in light of their covenant.

Now to the married I command, not I, but the Lord, do not let the [believing] wife depart from her husband. But if she departs, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And do not let the husband send away his wife.

-1 Corinthians 7:10-11


But if the unbeliever departs, let that one depart. A brother or a sister is not bound in such cases. God has called us to peace. For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?

-1 Corinthians 7:15-16

 

Just to quickly address the word "save" here. We must understand that this word also is subject to its context. One can be saved from a sinking ship. When Paul was in the storm in Acts 27 and told his fellow passengers to remain on the ship to be "saved," he obviously wasn't teaching "salvation by floatation." In 1 Corinthians, with the terrible prophetic days for Israel and the earth "at hand," Paul is thinking about physical salvation of the unbeliever.

Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, you cannot be saved.

-Acts 27:31

 

The Lord is also referring to physical salvation (rescue) when he notes in Matthew about enduring to the end. The end of what? The end of Israel tribulations. He is not teaching "salvation by surviving."

“The brother will deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child. And the children will rise up against their parents and cause them to be put to death. You will be hated by all men for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved. But when they persecute you in this city, escape into another. For truly I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

-Matthew 10:21-23 (spoken to his chosen disciples)

“So when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. Let him who is in the field not return to take his clothes. Woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse in those days! Pray that your escape will not be in the winter or on the Sabbath. For then will be great tribulation, such as has not happened since the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be. “Unless those days were shortened, no one would be saved..."

-Matthew 24:15-22 (spoken to his chosen disciples)

Let us return to the instructions for grafted-in Gentiles concerning marriage in 1 Cor 7. The first passage quoted from 1 Cor 7 above is specific to women believers. In light of the end, they were not to depart from their husbands. But if they did depart, they could not remarry. .The departing was then connected to obedience in light of the end (and perhaps not willing to bear children). In such a case, between believers, he was not free to divorce her. From earlier in the chapter (v.5) we know that this will leave him open to an attack from Satan, but it is allowed.

The word translated "divorce" in many versions (but not all) is the Greek word aphíēmi. I have changed the Modern English version above to "send away" instead of "divorce" (And do not let the husband send away his wife). When the Lord references the "certificate of divorcement" in Matthew 5:31 from the Law (Deut 24), he uses "apostásion." It is used three times in the Greek, all as part of "certificate of divorcement." 

I would suggest, the lack of the Greek word "apostásion" in 1 Cor 7 makes sense. Under the Law, the formal "bill of divorcement" is more than simply sending away or putting away. It has no direct application to Gentiles who were never under the Law. I think we can thus say, the "departing" and "sending away" of 1 Cor 7:10-11 is clearly to the gentile in that age. A believing husband and believing wife. She shouldn't just walk away and he should not send her away. 

The second passage (1 Cor 7:15-16) is regarding an unbelieving spouse (either male or female). No writ of divorcement (as required under the Law) is needed here as it would be if they were under the Law. If the unbeliever wants to leave, the believer is free to remarry. Under Roman Law this was allowed. But even here in God's eyes, for the grafted-in Gentile who was not under the Law (1 Cor 15, 21, etc.) nor ever under the Law (Rom 2:14; 1 Cor 9:21; etc.), Paul allows this rather "easy divorce." I say that, but Paul does not even use the word. 

In Israel if one just "sent away" his wife, there were still be restrictions on him and on her. There had to be cause under the Law for a writ of divorcement (Ex 21, Deut 24, etc.). If a wife is simply sent away and then marries another, he has caused her to then commit adultery. 

But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put (apolýō) away his wife, not for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery; and he who marries one put away (apolýō) commits adultery.

-Matthew 19:9 (Darby)

apolýō means to separate or loose. I believe the reason listed here (but not earlier in Matthew 5) concerning this question, "fornication," is a specific sin which makes the marriage itself null and void. The word  translated "fornication" is "porneía." It is translated as fornication in all 26 uses in the KJV. The word translated into some form of "adultery" is "moicháō" all six times in the KJV and in nine other translations that I checked (from literal to dynamic equivalencies) in including, obviously, in both Matthew 5 and 19. 

Under the Law, a bill of divorcement was required for very specific violations of the marriage covenant (as bullet pointed above). One could not simply "send away" his wife for any reason. We can sum it up this way (under the Law):

• A Writ of Divorcement was allowed for specific sins of treachery in marriage
• Sending away was only allowed only in the case of a discovery of fornication

When God divorced Israel, he did it under the terms of the covenant he had with them (and with them alone). God did not divorce Nineveh. God did not divorce Amalek, etc. God did not simply send away Israel without cause.

We come back to our opening questions. Why does God hate divorce? Did God do that which he hated against his own Law (as Pastor John Paul Miller accused his wife)? Putting these thoughts together, we conclude: 

God does not hate the act of divorce, he hates the necessity of the act of divorce. God hates what leads to divorce.

If the accusations (presented with a great amount of evidence) against JP Miller in the Netflix docuseries are true, he is guilty of many acts of treachery against his wife (wives, if we count his first wife) and thus she had the right to divorce him. What God hates is his guilt in all these areas:

• sexual immorality
• adultery
• abuse (physical or emotional)
• lack of provision (to the best of one's ability)
• lack of affection

God doesn't hate divorce without cause. He hates the cause of divorce.

Next time we will look at God's divorce of Israel and what that means in light of prophecy and God's plans for the earth and the promised land. 

I saw that for all the adulteries of backsliding Israel, I had put her away and given her a bill of divorce. Yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear, but went and played the harlot also. 

-Jeremiah 3:8