December 15, 2025

My initial view on this subject is likely the prevailing view among most dedicated Christians who have not spent much time considering it, the relevant passages, or its history over the centuries. My novice view was this passage:

Matthew 5:31-32

“31. It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32. But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery”. KJV.

According to this passage, the only legitimate reason to get a divorce is if the spouse commits adultery. The question naturally arises: Are there other reasons why separation, divorce, or remarriage might be permissible? If so, what are those reasons?

I am not the final word on this subject. There are many opinions, which we will consider. We will provide historical context and scriptural references. Let’s start with relevant passages.

This passage seems pretty clear that the only legitimate reason for divorce is in the case of adultery. But is that the case? Who was Jesus talking to and why? Jesus is primarily addressing this to men rather than to women. If that is the case, which I believe it is, then what is the reason for it?

Old Testament prophets condemned the leaders of the Jews and men in general for divorcing their wives for frivolous reasons. If a woman is divorced by her husband for no good reason and has children, what was she expected to do? Was she commanded to go to work and neglect her children? How could she feed herself and her children without remarriage? And if she had to remarry, was that considered adultery? I have difficulty believing that. How about you?

This comment by Jesus appears primarily directed at the Jewish leaders. Many references will be provided in this article that support this position. Let us consider other passages.

Matthew 19:3–12

“3. The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
4. And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5. And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6. Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
7. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
8. He saith unto them, Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
9. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
10. His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
11. But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
12. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it”.

This passage expands on the subject. Anyone who marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery. God hates divorce and does not want it for anyone. However, let us remember that God divorced Israel for its repeated adultery, both physical and spiritual.

Here are more relevant passages.

Mark 10:2–12

“2. And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? Tempting him.
3. And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4. And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5. And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8. And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10. And in the house, his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery”.

Luke 16:18

“18. Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery”.

Romans 7:1–3

“1. Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2. For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man”.

1 Corinthians 7:10–16

“10. And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11. But if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12. But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband.
15. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God hath called us to peace.
16. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?”

               The New Testament consistently upholds a high view of marriage as a covenant instituted by God from creation (Matthew 19:4-6; Mark 10:6-9). Jesus teaches that Moses permitted divorce only because of the hardness of human hearts (Matthew 19:8). Jesus offers an exception for divorce in the case of ‘fornication’ (Greek: porneia), which many interpret as sexual immorality.

               Paul adds that circumstances such as abandonment by an unbelieving spouse (1 Corinthians 7:15) mean the believer is ‘not under bondage’ in such cases. This has historically been interpreted as grounds for separation and, in many Christian traditions, complete divorce with remarriage possible.

               Together, these passages shaped the early church’s strict approach to marriage, and they remain foundational in modern Christian discussions of divorce and remarriage. My first objective is to educate myself and others on the various views within Christian circles regarding this issue. Once that is complete, I will provide my concluding comments, to be faithful to God first and then helpful to those in difficult marriages.

Modern Evangelical Views on Divorce and Remarriage (Provided by ChatGPT)

This section summarizes the modern evangelical, especially Reformed and broadly conservative Protestant, positions on divorce and remarriage, with specific attention to cases involving:

• abandonment,
• chronic drunkenness,
• criminality,
• refusal to work or support a spouse,
• and abuse of spouse or children.

Most evangelicals base their doctrine on divorce primarily on Matthew 19, Matthew 5, and 1 Corinthians 7. Two universally accepted biblical grounds for divorce traditionally include:
• Adultery (Matthew 19:9)
• Abandonment by an unbelieving spouse (1 Corinthians 7:15)

While classical evangelical teaching recognized two grounds, many contemporary pastors and denominations have expanded the interpretation of these grounds in light of real-world situations, trauma-informed counseling, and legal protections for vulnerable family members.

Abandonment

Modern application frequently includes both physical and functional abandonment. Functional abandonment refers to a spouse’s persistent refusal to participate in the marriage covenant, even if still physically present.

Examples:

• Deserting the marital home permanently.
• Repeated incarceration due to criminal acts.
• Complete refusal of communication or marital partnership.

Chronic Drunkenness or Addiction

Many evangelical pastors hold that severe addiction can constitute covenant-breaking when:
• It leads to endangerment of spouse or children.
• It results in financial destruction of the household.
• It persists despite long-term pastoral care and treatment attempts.

Criminality

Suppose a spouse commits violent crimes, engages in criminal neglect, or continually brings legal danger upon the household for such things as theft and fraud. In that case, churches often interpret this as meeting the threshold of abandonment or covenant violation.

Refusal to Work / Financial Neglect

Although historically not grounds for divorce, many modern evangelical leaders treat chronic refusal to work, when combined with abandonment of financial responsibility, as a form of functional abandonment. This must be:
• Chronic
• Unrepentant
• Documented
• Harmful to the household

Abuse of Spouse or Children

This is the most significant modern shift. Today, nearly all major evangelical denominations recognize:
• Physical abuse
• Sexual abuse
• Severe psychological abuse
• Child endangerment

All of these can be seen as covenant-breaking behaviors that permit divorce; pastors generally advise immediate separation for safety.

Reformed or Calvinist Views

Reformed churches historically followed the Westminster Confession: adultery and abandonment only. Today, most Reformed bodies permit divorce in cases of domestic abuse, equating such abuse with abandonment or destructive covenant-breaking.

Broadly Conservative Protestant Views

Southern Baptist, Evangelical Free, Assemblies of God, Church of God, and many non-denominational churches allow divorce for adultery, abandonment, and severe abuse. Remarriage is permitted when divorce is judged biblically valid.

Summary

Modern evangelical views remain rooted in Scripture but apply biblical principles to complex situations such as abuse, addiction, criminality, and neglect. The trend is toward protecting vulnerable spouses and children while remaining faithful to biblical authority.

Now, let’s compare that with the early church’s views on divorce.

How did early church leaders understand marriage and divorce?

This segment contains extended quotations from early Christian writers (pre-Nicene and post-Nicene), along with relevant biblical citations. The purpose is to show how the early Church handled situations involving abuse, cruelty, criminality, and severe neglect within marriage.

BIBLICAL FOUNDATIONS (KJV)

Exodus 21:10-11 

“If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.”

1 Timothy 5:8 

“But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”

1 Corinthians 7:10–11 

“And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband.”

1 Corinthians 7:15 

“But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases.”

Malachi 2:16 

“For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away (divorce).” Emphasis added.

JEWISH CONTEXT (SUMMARY WITH SOURCES)

Mishnah Ketubot 5:7, 7:9 

A wife could seek separation if a husband: 

• failed to provide food or clothing 

• was violent 

• squandered assets 

• endangered the household

EARLY CHRISTIAN SOURCES and PRIMARY QUOTATIONS

1) Hermas – Shepherd of Hermas (2nd Century) – Mandate 4 

“But if the husband is wicked, and persists in his wickedness… the wife must remain apart from him. If he repents, she must receive him again, but not while he continues in his evil.” (ANF 2:22–23)

This seems to be a call, not a suggestion, to separate from a husband who refuses to cease persisting in his wickedness, according to Hermas.

2) Origen – Commentary on Matthew 14.23 

“If the wife or husband is in danger because the other is destroying the household or harming the children, let the endangered one flee…For God has not called us to live with danger, but to peace.” (PG 13:1245)

            Another strong suggestion, even a command, to flee from the one who continues to destroy the household, according to Origen.

3) Basil the Great – Canonical Letter 199 

“If a husband is dangerous to life, it is not blameworthy for the wife to withdraw.  But she must not be joined to another man while he lives.”(PG 32:737)

            Separation is appropriate, but not remarriage, according to Basil.

4) Basil the Great – Canonical Letter 217 

“When a man beats his wife with the intention to kill, or places her in peril, she is worthy to be separated. But let her remain unmarried.” (PG 32:805)

            Separation is appropriate, but remarriage is not.

5) John Chrysostom – Homily on 1 Timothy 5 

“He who provides not for his own is worse than an infidel. Such a one is more savage than wild beasts…If he beats, abuses, or endangers the wife or children, he is a destroyer of the home.” (NPNF 1:13, p. 437)

            Separation appears to have been called for, but no mention of remarriage.

6) John Chrysostom – Homily on Colossians 12 

“When the house becomes a place of slaughter, flee. For the Lord has not commanded us to be joined to madness.” (NPNF 1:13)

7) Augustine – On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.10 

“A woman may separate herself from a husband who is cruel, dangerous, or who drives her to sin… But she may not marry another while he lives.” (NPNF 1:5, p. 267)

            Separation permitted but not remarriage, according to Augustine.

8) Augustine – Letter 262 

“Cruelty is a just cause for separation, not for a new marriage.” (NPNF 1:1, p. 452).

            Separation permitted but not remarriage, according to Augustine. Please refer to my articles on Augustine, as they may help you decide on how much weight you place on his beliefs. I put very little confidence in his teachings.

SUMMARY OF EARLY CHRISTIAN TEACHING

Across all major Fathers:

• Separation is permitted for CRUELTY, VIOLENCE, DANGER, CRIMINALITY, and NEGLECT. 

• Remarriage is not permitted while the spouse lives (Western view). 

• Eastern Christian Fathers also forbade remarriage except in rare cases (later Byzantine exceptions developed slowly). 

• Abuse of children is treated as an immediate cause for separation. 

• Destruction of the home (gambling, theft, drunken rampage) is treated as covenant treachery.

Conclusions Based on Early Christian Beliefs

The early Church recognized the seriousness of marriage while acknowledging the duty to protect women and children from destructive husbands. While divorce and remarriage were not permitted except for adultery in most regions, not all areas, separation for safety and sanity was strongly affirmed across the early Christian tradition. These are not my views but those of early Christian leaders.

My view is that there are legitimate reasons beyond adultery for divorce and possible remarriage. I am not the final authority; God is. If you love God, you will seek Godly advice and pray to God about your situation before making a final decision.

How did the Jews, the Early Church, and Christian Fathers View the Difficult Cases, Beyond Adultery, About Permitting Divorce

The following segment summarizes how Jewish law, the early church, and early Christian Fathers understood cases involving abusive, criminal, negligent, or dangerous husbands. That includes husbands who steal, refuse to work, are violent, harm children, and destroy household resources.

KEY POINTS

• Early Christians forbade divorce and remarriage except in cases of adultery.

• However, they strongly permitted even strongly commanded separation in cases of:

  – abuse

  – violence

  – criminal activity

  – danger to wife or children

  – severe neglect or refusal to work

  – destruction of finances (e.g., gambling)

Separation could be permanent, but remarriage was generally not permitted; however, there are exceptions. I personally would agree that there are exceptions.

This position is consistent across Hermas, Origen, Basil the Great, Chrysostom, Augustine, and others.

JEWISH BACKGROUND

Jewish background (Exodus 21:10-11) allowed a woman to leave if deprived of food, clothing, or marital rights. Jewish law before and during the time of Jesus permitted a woman to separate from her husband if:

• He deprived her of food, clothing, or marital rights (Exodus 21:10-11).

• He was violent or dangerous.

• He squandered the family’s assets or engaged in reckless behavior.

• He failed to provide necessities.

Although only the husband could issue a formal divorce, the rabbis allowed protective separations for safety and survival.

Jewish law fully permitted her to remarry. She was not expected to survive on her own with her children. Deut. 24:2. They believed that a divorce without the possibility of remarriage was no divorce at all. Because some Jewish men would divorce their wives for frivolous reasons, this practice seems to be the only loving thing to do. She must be able to remarry so that she and her children can survive. All that makes sense to me. God will correct me if I am mistaken.

Yet some Christian traditions make no exceptions for remarriage after divorce, as evidenced below.

EARLY CHRISTIAN TEACHING

Hermas (2nd Century)

   – Allowed permanent separation from a wicked or dangerous husband.

   – No remarriage allowed.

Is this not like adding insult to injury? Is this not an even greater cruelty to the woman and her children? This is a complex topic because, at least today, remarriages are even more challenging to navigate. Will the new husband treat the children as his own? Often, but not always, that is not the case. Great care must be taken. Many of those who live in poverty today are in single-parent households. My comment applies to all other early church fathers who did not permit remarriage, and most did not.

Origen (3rd Century)

   – Approved fleeing from a violent or dangerous husband.

   – No remarriage.

Basil the Great (4th Century)

   – Explicitly states a wife may withdraw from a life-threatening husband.

   – No remarriage.

John Chrysostom (4th Century)

   – Condemns husbands who refuse to work, abuse family, or ruin finances.

   – Supports separation for safety and moral protection.

Augustine (4th–5th Century)

   – Allowed “separation from bed and board” for cruelty, abuse, and danger.

   – Remarriage forbidden.

SPECIFIC SITUATIONS

• Violence or Abuse:

  The wife was allowed to separate for safety, sometimes permanently.

• Criminal Behavior:

  Theft, violence, or endangering the household resulted in separation and church discipline.

• Refusal to Work:

Based on 1 Timothy 5:8, such a man “denies the faith.” Separation was permitted if the wife was endangered.

• Gambling or Destroying Finances:

  Seen as theft from wife and children, grounds for long-term separation.

• Harm to Children:  Universally condemned. Fathers who endangered children justified immediate separation and church discipline.

SUMMARY

The early church did NOT require a wife to remain with:

• an abuser

• a violent man

• a criminal

• a man who endangered children

• a thief or gambler who destroyed the home

• a man who refused to work or provide

She could separate, even permanently. But remarriage was not allowed unless the husband died or was guilty of adultery (views varied by region).  The following section provides a deeper look at these regional differences, including the exceptions made. They are worth considering.

Regional Differences in Early Christian Views on Separation, Divorce, and Remarriage

This segment summarizes how early Christian teachings on separation, divorce, and remarriage varied by region. It includes Jewish background, Western Latin views, Eastern Greek traditions, Syriac perspectives, Alexandrian teachings, and later Byzantine developments.

Western (Latin) Church. Rome & North Africa

• Fathers: Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine 

• Strictest view in antiquity 

• Separation permitted for:

  – abuse

  – violence

  – criminal behavior

  – danger to wife or children

  – severe neglect or abandonment 

• Remarriage was never permitted while the spouse lived.

• Even adultery did not permit remarriage.

I must say that Jesus Christ did not teach that remarriage was not allowed in the case of adultery, for He permitted divorce in the case of adultery. And let us remember that God divorced Israel.

2. Eastern (Greek) Church. Constantinople & Asia Minor

• Fathers: John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory Nyssa 

• More pastoral flexibility 

• Separation allowed for:

  – violence

  – cruelty

  – danger

  – criminal activity 

• Remarriage sometimes permitted, depending on circumstances:

  – adultery

  – abandonment

  – total moral collapse

  – attempted murder or severe abuse 

3. Syriac Tradition. Antioch, Edessa, Nisibis

• Fathers: Aphrahat, Ephrem the Syrian 

• Separation allowed for:

  – cruelty

  – drunkenness

  – criminal behavior

  – failure to provide 

• Remarriage is usually forbidden, but not always. 

• Some exceptions for abandonment or disappearance of spouse

 Alexandrian Tradition. Egypt (Clement & Origen)

• Robust emphasis on moral purity 

• Separation allowed for danger or wickedness 

• Remarriage is generally prohibited, but not always 

• Adultery is often, but not always, treated as the only acceptable cause for divorce 

Byzantine (Later Eastern) Development

• Expanded list of legitimate causes for ecclesiastical divorce:

  – adultery

  – abandonment

  – attempted murder

  – abuse endangering life

  – criminal activity 

• Remarriage allowed after ecclesiastical divorce 

• Became the basis of modern Eastern Orthodox canonical practice

Summary Table of Regional Views

Western Latin Church:

• Separation allowed 

• No remarriage, even after adultery.  

• Strict Augustinian influence (which explains why so many Christians even consider this idea.) 

Eastern Greek Church:

• Separation allowed 

• Remarriage is sometimes permitted 

• Pastoral approach with multiple causes considered 

Syriac Churches:

• Separation allowed 

• Remarriage is generally forbidden, but not always 

• Limited exceptions for disappearance or abandonment 

Alexandrian/Egypt:

• Separation allowed 

• Remarriage discouraged or forbidden.

• Strong ascetic focus 

Byzantine East:

• Separation allowed 

• Remarriage was allowed for several causes 

• Groundwork for modern Orthodox practice 

CONCLUSION

Early Christianity universally allowed separation for abuse, danger, or severe wrongdoing. The primary difference between Eastern and Western Christianity was whether remarriage was permitted afterward. Western regions prohibit remarriage outright, whereas Eastern regions have developed more nuanced pastoral approaches that allow it.

It appears to me that the Eastern Christian Church was more Biblical than the Western Branch of Christianity, which is what we all in the USA inherited. This is heavily influenced by Augustine’s works, which is unfortunate. See my articles on Augustine on my website.

Early Christian Interpretation of Old Testament Marriage Abuses and Their Connection to New Testament Teaching

Early Christian writers frequently connected the moral and covenantal breakdowns in Old Testament Israel, especially unjust divorce practices, to the controversies and abuses present in Jewish society during the time of Jesus. They taught that Christ restored the ideal of the original creation (Genesis 1-2) by confronting the same hard-heartedness that the prophets condemned (Malachi 2:13-16; Isaiah 1; Hosea 3).

Early Christian Fathers on Old Testament Divorce Abuses (from ChatGPT)

John Chrysostom (4th Century)

Chrysostom repeatedly emphasized that the Jews had corrupted Moses’ concession into a tool for cruelty. In Homily 62 on Matthew, he states: “The Jews, abusing the allowance given by Moses, put away their wives for causes the most trifling … Christ therefore rescinds this indulgence, recalling them to the original law.” That is a critically important comment.

He directly links Deuteronomy 24 to Malachi’s condemnation of treachery: “For the prophets rebuked them, saying, ‘You have dealt treacherously with the wife of your youth.’ … Christ restores what was from the beginning.”

Our views on these complex subjects should not demonstrate indifferent cruelty but the compassion of God. Charity is the fulfillment of the law.

Tertullian (Late 2nd – Early 3rd Century)

In De Monogamia, Tertullian teaches that Moses’ divorce provision was a concession to Israel’s degeneration: “Hardness of heart it was that extorted from Moses the dissolution.” He argues that Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 19 abolishes the abuses of the Old Covenant system and reinstates the pre-fall unity of man and woman.

Origen (3rd Century)

Origen reads Deuteronomy 24 through the lens of the prophets, asserting that God allowed divorce only to restrain greater evil. In his Commentary on Matthew XIV, he writes: “The bill of divorce was given because they were already casting out their wives without witness … the Law sought to limit their injustice.”

Basil the Great (4th Century)

Basil, in his Canonical Letters, connects Malachi’s rebuke of ‘treachery’ to the behavior of men in his own day who imitated the abuses of ancient Israel. He warns that Christian husbands must not act as the Jews did by discarding the wife of their youth to take another.

These quotes support what I claimed earlier in this article. In Matthew, the particular focus on what Jesus said applied mainly to the Jewish men and their abuse of their wives.

How the Early Church Connected OT Abuses to NT Jewish Practice

Early Christian teachers believed that by the first century, Jewish men, especially followers of the Hillelite school, had returned to the same destructive behaviors condemned in Malachi: divorcing wives “for any cause,” taking younger women, and manipulating the Law for personal advantage (cf. Mishnah Gittin 9:10).

Thus, when Jesus confronted the Pharisees in Matthew 19:3-9, the Fathers saw Him as addressing not merely a theoretical question, but widespread marital corruption patterned after Old Testament covenant-breaking.

Key Biblical References

• Deuteronomy 24:1-4. Mosaic regulation of divorce

• Malachi 2:13-16. God condemns treachery against the wife of one’s youth

• Ezra 9-10. Intermarriage and abandonment

• Hosea 1-3. God is a faithful husband to an unfaithful spouse

• Matthew 5:31-32. Jesus corrects misinterpretations of Moses

• Matthew 19:3-9. Jesus restores the creation standard

• Mark 10:2-12. Indissolubility is emphasized without exception

• 1 Corinthians 7. Pauline’s guidance on marriage and abandonment

Footnotes

1. Chrysostom, Homily 62 on Matthew, PG 58.

2. Tertullian, De Monogamia, ANF 4.

3. Origen, Commentary on Matthew XIV, PG 13.

4. Basil the Great, Canonical Epistles, PG 32.

5. Mishnah Gittin 9:10 – Hillel’s interpretation of Deut 24.

If you are interested in the complete historical timeline of Divorce and Remarriage, please see the appendix.

Modern Evangelical Views on Divorce and Remarriage

This segment summarizes contemporary evangelical (including Reformed, Baptist, Pentecostal/Charismatic, and non-denominational) positions on divorce and remarriage, with specific treatment of abandonment, drunkenness/addiction, criminality, refusal to provide, and abuse (including child abuse). It presents the main camps, typical pastoral applications, and common scriptural and theological rationales.

Please keep in mind that even for those denominations that take a rigorous view of not allowing for remarriage, they actually do not treat marriage as sacred, in my opinion. Let me explain. Some of them actually believe that born-again Christians can commit adultery and unlawfully divorce and still be a child of God on their way to heaven because they are eternally secure. So even if they do not permit remarriage, for all practical purposes, Christians can and do divorce and get remarried. They are eternally secure, even if it is a blatant sin, according to their own theology. That is why I doubt their claim that they hold marriage as sacred. Their view on eternal security is a license for sinful divorce and remarriage. They will undoubtedly object to my statement, but that doesn’t make it untrue.

Overview: Three Broad Evangelical Camps

Evangelical churches today generally fall into three broad camps regarding permissible grounds for divorce and remarriage. These are descriptive categories; individual congregations and pastors may vary.

A. Strict view on remarriage (Minority):

Divorce is permitted only for adultery (Matthew 19:9) and abandonment by an unbeliever (1 Corinthians 7:15). Separation may be allowed for safety, but remarriage while the spouse lives is prohibited. And as just mentioned, even if there is adultery as a result of remarriage, almost all evangelicals believe it is covered under the blood and the eternal security of the believer in most cases.

B. Moderate (Majority):

Divorce permitted for adultery, abandonment (including functional or ongoing abandonment), severe and ongoing physical abuse, criminal behavior that endangers the family, chronic unrepentant addiction (drunkenness/drugs) that destroys the marriage, and persistent refusal to provide (1 Timothy 5:8). Remarriage is permitted for the innocent spouse.

C. Expanded Pastoral (Very Common):

Broad pastoral allowances: adultery, abandonment, abuse (physical, sexual, severe emotional/psychological), child abuse, criminality, chronic addiction, financial exploitation/gambling/ theft, and lengthy imprisonment. Remarriage is commonly permitted for the abused or abandoned spouse.

This overview reveals that within evangelical churches, there is compassion so that cruelty is not added to cruelty in denying the possibility of remarriage based on certain conditions. However, their view on eternal security undermines the gospel and marriage, in my opinion.

Specific Situations and Typical Evangelical Responses

Abandonment

Physical desertion by spouse (moving out, leaving home permanently) is treated as grounds for divorce under 1 Corinthians 7:15 in Moderate and Expanded camps. Pastors often call this ‘desertion’ and permit remarriage for the innocent spouse.

Physical Abuse (Spousal)

Nearly universal evangelical consensus: ongoing physical violence justifies separation and, in most churches today, grounds for divorce and remarriage. Pastors routinely prioritize safety, legal protection, and pastoral care.

Child Abuse

Treated as a grave breach of the marriage covenant. Child abuse leads to immediate separation, legal action, and grounds for divorce; remarriage is permitted for the non-offending parent.

Drunkenness / Addiction

Chronic and unrepentant substance abuse that destroys marriage and family is commonly treated as grounds for divorce; if it includes neglect, theft, or violence, most evangelical pastors will permit divorce and remarriage.

Criminal Behavior

Theft, violent crime, sexual crimes, incarceration for an extended period, these are seen as grounds for divorce and remarriage when the family is endangered, or the spouse has effectively repudiated marital duties.

Refusal to Provide / Financial Neglect

Interpreting 1 Timothy 5:8 practically, chronic refusal to work or deliberate gambling and or theft of family resources is treated as abandonment and may justify divorce in many evangelical contexts.

Emotional / Psychological Abuse

Views vary: severe, ongoing emotional abuse (gaslighting, coercive control, sustained degradation) is increasingly regarded as valid grounds for separation and sometimes divorce, mainly when it produces real danger or incapacitation.

Adultery / Sexual Immorality

Adultery is universally recognized as a legitimate biblical ground for divorce. Many or most evangelicals allow remarriage for the innocent party.

Theological Rationales Used by Modern Evangelicals

• Biblical exegesis: Matthew 19:3-9 (exception for porneia) and 1 Corinthians 7:10-16 (Pauline privilege) are the primary texts.
• ‘Functional desertion’ hermeneutic: many argue that unrepentant conduct that destroys the marriage functions as abandonment.
• Covenant theology: marriage is a covenant; breach by grave sin (abuse, theft, endangerment) can be interpreted as unilateral renunciation.
• Justice and protection: the church must protect the vulnerable; permitting remarriage in cases of grave wrong is seen as mercy.

Notable Voices and Institutional Statements

Examples (representative, not exhaustive):
• Southern Baptist Convention resources (pastoral guides) increasingly support divorce/remarriage in abuse cases.
• PCA and many conservative Presbyterian bodies interpret 1 Cor 7:15 to allow divorce in abandonment; treat abuse as desertion.
• Assemblies of God and many Pentecostal bodies support divorce/remarriage for abuse and abandonment.
• Pastoral counselors and evangelical scholars (e.g., D.A. Carson, Kevin DeYoung, Timothy Keller, in some applications) advocate protecting victims while balancing the call to repentance and reconciliation.

Note: Denominational statements vary; always consult a local denomination’s formal position for polity-specific rules.

Practical Advice Evangelical Pastors Give Today

• Believe survivors and prioritize safety.
• Encourage legal remedies and separation when necessary.
• Provide counseling and clear boundaries for any possible restoration.
• Use church discipline when appropriate; require concrete repentance before restoration.
• When remarriage occurs, treat it as pastoral restoration rather than a simple legal act, often preceded by a period of repentance and oversight.

Bibliography by ChatGPT

• D. A. Carson, ‘Divorce and Remarriage in the New Testament’ (articles and essays).

• Kevin DeYoung, ‘The Hole in Our Holiness’ (on pastoral ethics, chapters on marriage).

• Timothy Keller, ‘The Meaning of Marriage’ (pastoral approach).

• Southern Baptist Convention, ‘Marriage and Family’ pastoral resources.

• PCA Committee reports and pastoral resources on divorce and remarriage.

Comments

Divorce and remarriage are rampant in evangelical churches, just like the rest of our culture. Even if the divorce rate is lower than that of the culture at large, it ought to be much lower than in other churches and the general public. Something is terribly wrong. Almost everyone agrees on that.

Marriage and Divorce Among Evangelicals in the United States

This section summarizes current research on divorce patterns among evangelicals in the United States and compares them with national trends. Content is condensed with clear sections and citation-ready points.

National Divorce Context

CDC National Vital Statistics (2022 provisional) reports the U.S. divorce rate at approximately 2.4 divorces per 1,000 population, with about 672,000 divorces reported in 45 states.

Evangelicals in National Surveys

Barna: Some reports show evangelicals at around 26% ever divorced, often comparable to or slightly lower than national averages.

 Pew: Pew’s Religious Landscape Study indicates that Christians represent a large share of divorced Americans, but this reflects population size more than higher divorce propensity. Pew also notes that the likelihood of an evangelical divorce varies significantly by attendance, region, education, and income.

The “Religious Marriage Paradox.”

               Academic research, including Baylor-related findings, shows that some evangelical-majority regions (notably the Bible Belt) exhibit higher divorce rates.
               The dominant causes appear to be socioeconomic: younger age at marriage, lower income, fewer educational opportunities, and distinctive regional marital norms, not evangelical theology itself.

Religious Practice vs. Religious Label

               Harvard’s Human Flourishing Program and other longitudinal studies consistently find that regular religious service attendance reduces divorce risk substantially. That is important. And even if you can’t find an evangelical church that doesn’t teach the whole counsel of God, you may be able to find a few other like-minded Christians to gather with.

               One large-scale study reports approximately a 50% lower risk of divorce among weekly attenders compared with non-attenders. Therefore, participation, rather than identification alone, is the strongest protective factor.

Stressors Common in Evangelical and Non-Religious Marriages

Research suggests that evangelicals experience the same divorce-related stressors seen in the broader U.S. population:

• Abuse or domestic violence (spousal or child)
• Addiction (alcohol, drugs, gambling)
• Criminal activity or repeated incarceration
• Economic instability, unemployment, or refusal to work
• Mental health crises and chronic conflict

These factors predict divorce strongly across all demographics, including evangelicals.

Key Sources for Further Study provided by ChatGPT

• CDC National Vital Statistics Reports: U.S. marriage and divorce data.
• Pew Research Center: Religious Landscape Study and divorce statistics.
• Barna Group: Evangelical marriage and divorce research reports.
• Council on Contemporary Families (via Baylor summaries): analysis of regional divorce patterns.
• Harvard Human Flourishing Program: religion and divorce risk longitudinal research.

Summary of Findings

• Evangelicals as a broad group sometimes display divorce levels similar to national averages.
• Evangelicals who regularly attend church services tend to exhibit significantly lower divorce rates.
• Regional cultural influences artificially elevate divorce rates in some evangelical-dense areas.
• The most influential drivers of divorce among evangelicals mirror those of the general population. And that is the issue. These drivers should not exist within evangelical churches to the extent that they do. Why do they? The answer follows.

Why do the drivers of divorce among evangelicals mirror those of the general population?

If evangelicals were actually living godly, righteous lives, this would be very different and much better. When evangelical teaching allows for constant sin in the life of the Christian, this is the result one should expect. When Christians are told that they come to Jesus in their sins, leave in their sins, and live as Christians in their sins, this is precisely what we should expect. We should expect to witness unlawful divorce and remarriage and every other type of sin against God.

And could it be that our evangelical churches are filled with unregenerate professing ‘Christians’ who never repented from their sins? In some cases, they were told that repentance from sin is unrelated and even optional to their salvation. Just believe in Jesus, and you are saved. He did it all, and there is nothing you need to do but to trust in His finished work. You should want to repent of your sins, but if you don’t, you’ll still go to heaven.

 In other cases, these nominal Christians are told that repentance is synonymous with faith and that faith is consistent with faithlessness and infidelity.  According to these blind guides, saving faith doesn’t imply obedience to God’s laws.

Still, some of these nominal Christians are convinced that the moral laws of God have been abrogated under the New Testament. Christians are no longer required to obey the moral laws of God because the law of love has replaced them. And that law of love, in their warped view, is consistent with direct violations of the prior moral law given by God.

And finally, almost all Christians are taught that they should never expect to be free from the practice and repetition of sin. They are told that they will continue to sin, more or less, for the rest of their lives. Even with the power and grace of God, Christians can’t be victorious over the sin nature everyone is born with. They are told that holiness comes slowly, and they are never expected to stop all sinning in this life. They have been brainwashed into believing that genuine Christians continue to sin daily. Sin is the rule in their life, and righteousness is the exception, which is just the exact opposite of the truth of God. The gospel of Jesus Christ transforms sinners into saints who walk in righteousness, not in sin.

And we wonder why the evangelical church is carnal and full of unsaved and backslidden ‘Christian’ hypocrites who turn many away from God to everlasting destruction.

My advice to those in a challenging marriage follows. These are my suggestions, listed in order of priority.

• Draw near to God in truth. Read the word of God and pray often.
• Come clean and stay clean with God and everyone else as far as it is up to you, especially during this time. If you are not clean before God or right with Him, you probably will not hear from Him about your situation until you are. If you do hear something you think is from God, it probably isn’t. The word says that if we regard iniquity in our hearts, the LORD will not listen to us.
• Pray that your spouse will do the same.
• Pray without ceasing. Come boldly to God’s throne often.
• Do not make any rash decisions unless your safety or the safety of children is at stake. If safety is a genuine concern, separate immediately. Call the police as needed, despite your anxiety and fear.
• If your situation isn’t that desperate, talk to your spouse and be brutally honest, no matter how difficult that is. Few of us like to do such things, but it may improve the situation. If you do nothing, your situation will most likely never improve.
• Give it time. Listen to God and do exactly what He lays on your heart. That may be to separate temporarily. It may involve counseling, both individual and couples counseling. Seek godly counsel.
• If separation works and things improve, you may be able to save your marriage. If not, try again or keep trying until you can’t take any more. Get God’s guidance all the way. Trust Him and do what He leads you to do, even if it is different from the advice you are being given.
• Under certain circumstances, much longer separation, even divorce, may be the only viable option. From this brief article, you know when and for what reasons divorce has been and is permitted within the Christian church over the centuries. You should consider that.
• Now that you are better informed and right with God, what do you believe God wants you to do? Do that, if you are clean before God. If not, come clean with God first before you make any final decisions.
• You must hear from God directly based on your situation. Do what you honestly believe He is telling you to do.
• If you do get divorced, remarriage is even more critical and risky if you have children. You must be so careful and prayerful. In many cases, remaining single until the children are fully grown may be the preferable option if financially feasible. But sometimes a genuine man or woman of God might be found and be acceptable for remarriage.

This is not an article that I wanted to write, nor one that I approached lightly. I do believe that there are legitimate reasons, besides adultery, for separation, divorce, and remarriage. But this is your soul and your life, so make sure you have the blessings of God in what you do and why you do it.

 

 

 

 

Appendix

Complete Historical Timeline on Divorce and Remarriage (ChatGPT)

1st Century (New Testament Era)

Jesus’ teachings (Matt 5 and 19; Mark 10; Luke 16) establish the indissolubility of marriage, except in cases of porneia or adultery. Paul (1 Cor 7) introduces the Pauline privilege under abandonment.

2nd–3rd Century

The Didache prohibits divorce; Hermas emphasizes repentance; Tertullian condemns remarriage.

4th Century

Basil’s canons regulate abandoned spouses; Chrysostom stresses moral gravity; Councils of Elvira and Arles legislate.

5th Century

Augustine solidifies the Western doctrine of indissoluble sacramental marriage; remarriage is seen as adultery.

6th–9th Century

Byzantine practice develops economia; Justinian legislation structures civil divorce.

10th–12th Century

Eastern canonists expand grounds for divorce; Western Church moves toward absolute indissolubility.

12th Century

Gratian synthesizes the Fathers; Aquinas articulates natural law arguments.

16th Century

Reformers (Luther, Calvin) allow divorce for adultery or desertion; Anabaptists are strict.

17th–19th Century

Orthodox Church maintains economia; Roman Catholic doctrine fixed at Trent; Protestant diversity expands.

20th–21st Century

Modern denominations articulate varied views; the Orthodox maintain penitential remarriage is possible; Catholics hold to the indissolubility of marriage but allow dissolution more freely; Evangelicals are divided.