Like any avid reader of God’s Word, I’m just thrilled when
something quite remarkable comes to my attention regarding a fresh and better
interpretation of the biblical text.
Two recent articles, God on Divorce, and Jesus on Divorce, by Marg Mowczko of New Life blog, came to my attention through Christian
Bloggers Network on Facebook.
What Mowczko was able to show was a great encouragement to me, a
remarried divorcee. In context of Malachi 2:16 — an historical proof-text
that “God hates divorce” — the biblical Word may not, and does not in fact,
appear to say that at all.
What this verse says in reality is not that God hates divorce
under all circumstances, but that a man, “he
hates and divorces his wife” with the presumption that he divorces (lit. “sends
her away”) unjustifiably (where the only justification is notionally adultery) and
therefore he does violence against her.
This verse makes no sense if it says “God hates divorce,” because the
second half of the verse is talking directly about the man who divorces his
wife. The bulk of Malachi 2:16 is a
conditional “if… then” sentence. The
protasis (if…) and apodosis (… then) always have the same context.
I wish to draw your attention to the graphic above, so you can
contrast the differences in the interpretation between five popular translations
of the Bible. Isn’t it staggering? Three of those versions say something quite
different to the other two (even if the NIV has a foot in both camps looking at
the footnotes).
Anthony Petterson prefers, ‘“If
he hates [her enough] to divorce,” says Yahweh God of Israel, “he [the husband] covers a violence on his
garment.”’[1] By going about remarrying as if he were
innocent, having divorced her without cause, he is concealing a violence done
to her. In fact, if either gender was to
divorce (refuse to reconcile) their partner, without cause, they do a violence
to that partner. At the very least, the
maligned partner would be allowed to remarry.
Douglas Stuart’s[2]
rendition of Malachi 2:15b-16 is also helpful: “So watch out for your lives and do not be unfaithful to your childhood
wife. If one hates and divorces [Yahweh,
Israel’s God, said], he covers his clothes with crime.” Presumably, the
clothes are no longer seen on the divorcing husband’s body, only the crime (which,
as a word, is said by Stuart to be vaster and more descriptive than “violence”).
“Hating” one’s wife (or husband) may still not be grounds for
divorce, given that even marital unfaithfulness can, at times, be overcome. But one ought not be “hated” for divorcing
either, especially if the one divorcing is doing it for their own and their
children’s safety. Rather than be hated,
criticised or condemned, that person ought to be commended for the courage they’ve
taken to provide safety for themselves and their dependents.
I personally have never heard a sermon devoted to Malachi 2:16
or “God hates divorce,” but I’m sure there have been many of these sermons
preached. Such sermons would be a misuse
of the biblical text at best; at worst they offer a pastoral noose with which
divorced persons or victims of divorce could well hang themselves.
I’m sure God does actually
hate divorce, because it severs a covenant He witnessed and ordained, but it’s
unfair to say that through Malachi 2:16, simply because the text doesn’t say
that.
***
The practical outworking of this
reframing of God’s Word to challenge “God hates divorce” is extremely
encouraging for many divorcees. Many,
many people are victims of divorce, and would never have chosen it, having
rather remained married, if it were more appropriate or possible to do so.
Too many divorcees have been
sullied by their divorces, and incorrect interpretation of Malachi 2:16 hasn’t
helped their cause, because, frankly, Malachi 2:16 does not say, “God hates
divorce.”
Perhaps out of all the versions
shown in the above graphic, the New Living Translation (NLT) comes closest to
showing that God not so much abhors divorce, but more the unfaithful treatment
of the person being divorced.
© 2016 Steve Wickham.
No comments:
Post a Comment