For Men Only

The Exception Clause

The 'exception clause' in Matthew's Gospel (5:32 & 19:9) was given to men only and not to women.
Deut.24:1-2 was also given to men only and not to women.
Even if you disagree with my interpretation of the exception clause, you must agree that it is only for men. And however you view Deut. 24 you must agree that it is only for men. There is no place in the Bible where a woman is granted provision to divorce her husband under any circumstances. None. There are good reasons for separation, and sometimes that is necessary, but there is no provision for divorce. The scriptures concerning divorce [and/or remarriage] are directed toward the men because the men are commanded to be the head of the family.

This important fact has been overlooked or avoided by most churches today, and the results are disastrous. Too many churches have formulated guilty party policies or statements on divorce and remarriage that ignore the differences between men and women and concentrate on the innocent [victim] and guilty [perpetrator] parties irrespective of gender. This sounds good on the surface but it ignores the important order that God has established. A major mistake. If the churches only kept the 'men only' context of the above mentioned texts the problems would be reduced. Why? Because more women initiate divorce than men as statistics show.

When a state or country has no fault divorce laws as most western countries do, [since about the 1970s - 80s.] it is always the women who are the main party when it comes to initiating a divorce, roughly 70% women and 30% men[1]. Extra incentive is provided by the Family Law courts for women to divorce their husbands in the form of big pay outs. If a wife is unhappy she can just get a divorce and chances are she will receive custody of the children and income and perhaps even the family home. The husband is often left with all the bills and none of the thrills, and little contact with his children. Hordes of women have gone down this path, betraying their families for their pursuit of happiness\lust\money\revenge\freedom or whatever. The churches are largely powerless against this evil because their own leadership is plagued with feminists, and they have a politicised version of biblical marriage.

Divorced christian women all desire the coveted status of ‘innocent party’, for this purpose they require the services of a white knight. A white knight is a cleric or someone who holds a church office to deem them suitable for remarriage. Sadly the churches have plenty of such dummies who are ready to come to their assistance.

If you are wondering why more women initiate divorce than men I think it can be explained by the way we are made, and the resulting bond we create when we marry. Consider the purpose of God, and the fallen state of humanity. God made man to serve Him, and God made woman to serve man. But when sin entered into humanity men no longer serve God, and women no longer serve men, both parties rebel against the purpose they were created for. Today's churches seem scared to even mention the order of God in marriage, and how the husband is called to be the head of the family, and the wife is commanded to submit to her ...own husband as unto the Lord. Many of todays christian women despise the thought of submitting to their husbands, and want to wear the pants in the marriage, God's order is not for them.

Jesus said in Mark 10:12 And if a woman shall put away her husband,and be married to another,she committeth adultery. Paul also emphasised this point in his letter to the Corinthian church with the words 1Cor.7:39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married... And again to the Roman church Rom. 7:2 - 3 For the woman which hath a 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...

Some folks immediately ignore these verses and begin to point out that Paul was only using the example in Romans as a comparison of how the law works, as if Paul stuffed up his doctrine! Then like a drowning man clutching at straws they try to explain away what Jesus said with a ridiculous interpretation of the exception clause. Torturing the text until it confesses.

Many have re-interpreted it to allow women to divorce and remarry, but there is not even one example in the Scripture of a woman who is divorced and remarried and accepted as wed before God. This point highlights an interesting fact.

There are many examples of men with multiple wives (David, Solomon, and Jacob) who are saved and yet maintained their many relationships; the same cannot be said for women. Why? Because God made us that way. A woman cannot maintain multiple sexual relationships (polyandry) and be considered morally sound, but a man can (polygamy). The advances of feminism in the church today are so great that few even dare to express such views.

The Parable of the Padlock*

The following analogy is a useful way to explain to girls how men think. Men understand how they think but girls don't, you may find this useful to explain to your daughter the virtue [necessity] of chastity.
Men are keys.
Women are padlocks.
If a single key can open many padlocks it is considered a 'Master' key [think Solomon]. Master keys are esteemed amongst keys as somehow better than the rest. [This might be 'carnal' thinking but most men think like this.] But a padlock that can be opened by any key is considered useless as a padlock, what man would entrust his valuables [emotions, kids, house, etc] to a padlock that any key can open! This kind of padlock cannot be given valuables, it is no longer a lock, it is only useful as a key receptacle.

It seems that "equality" is the unspoken sacred cow creeping through churches today. Even if you interpret the 'exception clause' to include adultery you must concede that it still only applies to men and not women. My how far we have come from the truth as revealed in Scripture.

In today's politically correct climate, to be gender specific is considered taboo, but the Scripture is always gender specific when dealing with the topics of marriage, divorce and remarriage. Unfortunately, many [most?] churches try to address these topics with an egalitarian view, but by ignoring the differences between men & women the resulting document will either contradict the Scripture or leaves the reader to draw their own conclusions. Not good. Nearly every church has some kind of a statement-on-divorce-and-remarriage or guilty-party-policy, included in the Westminster Confession of Faith is such an example.

Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 24. Of Marriage and Divorce.
10] "In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce: [11] and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead."[12]

The wording is not gender specific, and although it doesn't directly say: the-same-rules-apply-for-men-as-for-women, that is what it means. This egalitarianism always rings alarm bells and yet I see it again and again.

Red Flag Warning! Please note the use of the words party, spouse, or partner. These words are used repeatedly instead of husband and wife or man and woman. Let the reader beware. This is not how the Bible shows it. Often this approach is to appease feminist sensibilities deeply ingrained in christianity and western psyche. This type of document has been produced to maximise appeal and minimise offence. It is a plague in the protestant churches [all stripes] If you want to see some really common ground amongst opposing denominations just look at their divorce apologetics, they should reconcile like Herod and Pilate.

 And indeed, many people and churches do use the same rules for men as for women in direct contradiction of the New Testament teaching. Now we see women divorcing their husbands and remarrying with the churches' blessing. Paul said otherwise; 1Cor. 7:39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth. Please note; If the 'exception clause' must be interpreted in a generic fashion then divorce must be forbidden for men and women, not the other way around. Now it has become the easy way to recycle divorcees into adultery.

 

[1]'These boots are made for walking': why most divorce filers are women.

http://www.unc.edu/courses/2010fall/econ/586/001/Readings/Brinig.pdf

* The parable of the padlock wasn't written by me, I read it online [not sure where] and paraphrased it. The author is unknown to me.