Defining Marriage
Various Definitions. Marriage has been defined variously and divergently, from “A legally and socially sanctioned union,”[1] to “A covenant between a man and a woman, in which they mutually promise co-habitation, and a continual care to promote the comfort and happiness of each other,”[2] and “The union between a man and a woman that is recognized by society and has intended permanency.”[3] The definitions available have quite a variance, but a Scriptural (Christian) definition of marriage must be both exegetically sound and experientially acceptable.
A Biblical Definition. Marriage is a permanent covenant (transcending the strictly legal contract) between one man and one woman in which they each commit themselves before God to an exclusive, loving, intimate relationship with one another until separated by death. Marriage is consummated physically, emotionally, and spiritually by sexual union (forming one out of two, or henosis). Marriage is characterized by giving glory to God (as a representation of the relationship between God and the Church), commitment, love for one another (respect, honor, and consideration), sexual exclusivity and purity, intimacy, open and loving communication, and God-ordained authority and roles.
Representation of God’s Relationship with the Church. The marriage relationship is essentially a representation of the relationship between Jesus and the Church (Eph. 5:31-33); just as Jesus submitted to his Father and gave himself wholly (sacrificially) for the Church, the husband is to submit himself to the Lord and devote himself to his wife in love (Eph. 5:25, 28) and in servanthood (John 13:14-17), respecting and considering her in all things (Col. 3:19; 1 Pet. 3:7). The wife, in turn, is to respect her husband and submit herself to him as an act of submission to the Lord (Eph. 5:22, 24, 33; Col. 3:18; 1 Pet. 3:1). One
commentator (referring to Eph. 5:22-24) remarked, “The relationship between Christ and the Church is necessarily normative for that between husband and wife in Christian marriage.”[4] Another says, “The strongest proof of the sanctity of the marriage relation in the sight of God is to be found in the fact that both in the Old and in the New Testaments, it is made the symbol of the relation between God and his people.”[5]
The Biblical Values of Marriage
Scripture, especially the New Testament, provides the basis for marital values. Marriage is based upon giving glory to God (as a representation of the relationship between God and the Church), commitment, love for one another (respect, honor, and consideration), sexual exclusivity and purity, intimacy, open and loving communication, and God-ordained authority and roles.
Giving Glory to God
According to the Westminster Larger Catechism, man’s chief and highest end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. We should seek to glorify God in every area of life, including our relationships. Each individual must place his relationship with God foremost in priority, even over the marriage relationship. Once the relationship priority is established in our lives, each spouse is able to adequately give to the other in marriage and, as a consequence, God is glorified. The type of love needed for all successful interpersonal relationships, of which marriage is the highest, can never come from within us; God is the only source of “true” love. Essentially, we love because he first loved us (1 Jn. 4:19), and the love of God is derived from our relationship with him and our desire to glorify him.
Commitment
Commitment means both never quitting or giving up, no matter how difficult the situation, and never compromising the exclusiveness and fidelity of the marriage relationship. Commitment is the foremost bond between spouses; it should be expressed often and with great earnestness.
Marriage involves love with commitment (“free” love is a sin against the body, cf. 1 Cor. 6:18b). Scripture emphasizes that the relational commitment of marriage is similar to the commitment people make to God when they accept his offer of covenant relationship (salvation). The Old Testament writers often referred to God’s covenants with his people Israel as a type of the marriage commitment, and fidelity is typically their greatest concern (i.e. the message of Hosea and his marriage to Gomer). What is the greatest sin man can commit against God? Idolatry, according to one writer. “Like the marriage covenant, the relationship between Yahweh and his people is a covenant of mutual love and trust. Like adultery, apostasy breaks the relationship by despising the love on which it is based, violating the trust, and treating the person as unworthy of exclusive and all-consuming commitment.”[6] Essentially, unfaithfulness to commitment (whether in relation to God or a spouse) is abhorred by God and the unfaithful incur consequences.
Love for One Another
We show our love for God and he is glorified when his will is heeded and we obey his written word. We obey God when we, as marriage partners, love each other. Paul expressed the husband-wife relationship in terms of the relationship between Christ and the church. He wrote in Ephesians 5:23, 25, “For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. . . . Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.”
Jesus reiterated the commandment in Leviticus (19:18) to “love your neighbor as yourself” in Matthew 19:19 and 22:39. This “second greatest commandment” Jesus referred to is the basis for all human relationships, whether marital or otherwise. Paul describes the love that God desires in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8.
Sexual Exclusivity and Purity
The uniqueness of sexual relations in marriage is underscored by the many injunctions in Scripture against infidelity. The most obvious injunction is the seventh commandment given in Exodus 20:14 (also Deuteronomy 5:18): “You shall not commit adultery.” Other Scripture references to the uniqueness of the marriage sexual union include Lev. 20:10; Prov. 6:32; Mat. 5:27-28, 19:18; Mk. 10:19; Lk. 18:20; and Rom. 2:22. The passage in Leviticus decrees death for adultery; in the Matthean passage, Jesus advocates destroying body parts rather than lusting. The writer of Hebrews tells us marriage should be honored by all and the marriage bed should be kept pure (Heb. 13:4).
Scripture places great emphasis upon sexual exclusivity and purity in marriage. As stated above (under “Commitment”), God uses the marriage relationship as a type of his relationship with people. Just as God demands fidelity and exclusiveness in those who accept his covenant, marriage partners must uphold the sexual exclusiveness of their relationship with each other.
Intimacy
Intimacy takes many forms in the marriage relationship: sexual, spiritual, emotional, social, and intellectual. Scripture reinforces the various intimate relations between husband and wife in many places. Genesis 2:24 says the husband and wife will become “one flesh,” the concept described by Paul in Ephesians 5:31-32 as a “mystery,” but having to do with love and respect for one another as Christ loves and respects the church, his bride.
As discussed in the last section above, marital intimacy is to be revered and upheld between spouses. Marital sexual fidelity is affirmed in 1 Corinthians 7:4, “The wife’s body does not belong to her alone, but also to her husband” and vice versa, and Hebrews 13:4, “Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.”
Husbands are to foster intimacy in marriage by treating the wife with respect and consideration (1 Pet. 3:7), by loving the wife as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her (Eph. 5:25), and by loving the wife as he does his own body (Eph. 5:28).
Open, Loving Communication
Open and loving communication is to be fostered between husband and wife just as the relationship between God and his people is fostered through prayer. We pray to God on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests (Eph. 6:18) in order to maintain a relationship with him, and express and increase our trust in him. Similarly, we openly and lovingly communicate with our mates in order to understand and relate to one another, and through this loving communication our trust and commitment grows. One commentator says, “All that we think or feel about God comes to expression in our prayer.”[7] Communication between spouses serves the same function.
The emphasis in marital communication is on “loving,” or doing to the other what we would have done to us (Matt. 7:12) and speaking the truth in love (Eph. 4:15). Peter’s injunction, “Husbands . . . be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect . . . so that nothing will hinder your prayers” (1 Pet. 3:7), places an emphasis on how relationships influence our prayers.
God-Ordained Authority and Roles
The relationship between husband and wife in a marriage can be likened to the trinitarian view of God. Just as God is thought of as three distinct and equal persons with particular functions or roles (i.e. what theologians term “economic subordination”) yet he is one God, so the marriage relationship consists of two equal persons with different roles or functions, yet they are one.
The authority in a marriage rests with the husband; he is the “head” over the wife (1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5:23; cf. Gen. 3:16) and leader of the family unit. The idea of “mutual submission” is not exegetically verifiable in Pauline writings. Many use Ephesians 5:21 to confirm the idea that “every Christian ought to be subject to every other Christian,” especially in the marriage relationship. But, as one commentator says, “the following context defines what Paul means by ‘be subject to one another’ in Ephesians 5:21: he means ‘Be subject to others in the church who are in positions of authority over you.’”[8] Husbands are never told to be subject to their wives in Scripture.
The idea of a wife submitting to her husband is much like our submission to an employer or government officials; submitting to authority does not mean being passive and agreeing with everything the person in authority says or suggests. A wife can be under her husband’s authority and still participate fully in the decision-making process in the family. The biblical pattern only works well when the husband is loving, considerate, and thoughtful in his leadership role, and the wife is joyful and intelligent in submission to her husband’s authority.
Marriage: Covenant or Contract?
Marriage has been described as either a covenant or a contract, and most commentators fall into one category or the other. We must first understand the difference between the two terms. A contract is an agreement between parties, characterized by quid pro quo (literally, “something for something”): “for value received I agree to pay . . .”[9] If either party fails to keep the agreement, the other is released from obligation. Many married couples in today’s society tend to view marriage from the contract standpoint. They have no qualms about dissolving their “legal agreement” simply because they feel the other has failed to keep their end of the arrangement. Modern society has its influence on marriage; it requires a legal contact for judicial purposes; if the court system needs to become involved in a marriage for purposes of handling assets and children, the judge needs to arbitrate according to the established legal system. Thus, for societal purposes, marriage is necessarily viewed as a legal contract. One commentator says, “Marriage was instituted before the existence of civil society, and therefore cannot in its essential nature be a civil institution. . . . It is a degradation of the institution to make it a mere civil contract.”[10] Scripture seems to indicate that we are to live beyond the standards of law — we should see marriage in terms of the relationship involved; this is usually designated a “covenant.” “Covenant” was the term used by the Second Vatican Council for marriage. One Catholic theologian expresses the purpose thus, “‘Covenant’ expresses the personal character of the consensus better than ‘contract’ or ‘institution.’ . . . The covenant of marriage is . . . a public and legal matter concerning the whole community of believers.”[11]
Two general categories of covenants exist: God’s covenants and covenants between men. The former is very unique in that God’s covenants are established by God alone. He sets up the conditions and particulars, and man is given the option of agreeing or disagreeing with the given parameters. Agreement with God’s covenants brings blessings, disagreement brings curses. The latter category of covenant is between humans, and is of two types: suzerainty and parity. A covenant of suzerainty is one in which, typically, “a great king imposes on lesser rulers, usually after he has done them some great favor.” [12] God’s covenants are similar to the suzerainty style of relationship. The covenant of parity, however, is a covenant between equals in which two individuals pledge vows of faith. Death was the consequence of breaking the covenant of parity. Such a covenant existed between David and Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:3; 20:16-17, 42; 23:18). Marriage is most similar to the covenant of parity.
Marriage is described as (or can be inferred as) a “covenant” in three places in the Old Testament. First, Proverbs 2:17 says, “[The wayward wife] forsakes the companion of her youth and she forgets the covenant of her God” (Author’s translation). The NIV translates this verse, “[The wayward wife] has left the partner of her youth and ignored the covenant she made before God.” The NIV’s translation is a bit dynamic, but the idea of marriage being related to a covenant may be inferred from the passage in Proverbs.
The second verse, Ezekiel 16:8b says, “I swore to you and I entered into a covenant with you, says the Lord yhwh, and you became mine” (Author’s translation). The context of this passage in Ezekiel is a marriage relationship, with God as the husband and Jerusalem representing the wife. The Sinai covenant is not overtly in view here; rather, it appears the passage is discussing the character of marriage itself. Thus here, again, marriage may be thought of as a covenant.
The third verse is the most well known, Malachi 2:14b: “You have acted treacherously against [the wife of your youth]; she is your consort, the wife of your covenant” (Author’s translation). Here, again, the concept of marriage as a covenant is alluded to, although not directly stated.
Given the Scriptural data as outlined above, marriage can be likened most closely to a “covenant of parity,” in which both the husband and wife are equal as persons, and they pledge permanent faithfulness to one another. This idea of “covenant” transcends the rudimental view of marriage as a legal contract.
Marriage: Sacrament or a Means of Grace?
In traditional Roman Catholic theology, marriage is sacramental. Catholics include the sacrament of matrimony along with six other activities performed in the church. The term “sacrament” in the Roman Catholic view is theologically unique; it means the activity being performed in and of itself is an actual means of salvation for the one receiving grace. The grace of God for ongoing salvation is contained in the activities ex opere operato (literally, “by the work performed”), meaning that “the sacraments work in virtue of the actual activity done, and that the power of the sacraments does not depend on any subjective attitude of faith in the people participating in them.”[13] Marriage as a Roman Catholic sacrament is viewed as contributing to salvation, regardless of the attitudes of the persons receiving.
Amongst certain Protestant groups marriage is viewed as a “means of grace.” A means of grace refers to “certain activities, ceremonies, or functions that God uses to give more grace to [the church].”[14] These means of grace are distinct from sacraments (in the Roman Catholic sense) primarily due to the belief that they do not in and of themselves contribute to salvation; they are simply means of additional blessing from God. Only the Holy Spirit (through the sacraments) can provide the grace necessary for salvation.
Marriage in the Protestant (reformed) tradition has not traditionally been considered sacramental. Protestants differ from Roman Catholics in the definition of sacraments. The reformed position on sacraments is presented in the Westminster Larger Catechism:
“A sacrament is an holy ordinance instituted by Christ in his church, to signify, seal, and exhibit unto those that are within the covenant of grace, the benefits of his mediation; to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces; to oblige them to obedience; to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another; and to distinguish them from those that are without.”[15]
The reformed church believes sacraments are those activities in the church which were instituted by Jesus and signified the benefits of his mediation. Thus, only baptism and the Lord’s supper can truly be thought of as sacramental. Although “Jesus himself . . . absolutely regarded the institution of marriage as honorable (He went to weddings, he enjoyed children, he understood the legitimacy, meaning, and glory of marriage),”[16] thus in a way fulfilling one criteria for marriage as sacramental status, marriage does not represent the work of Jesus on the cross, and therefore cannot be regarded as sacramental in a Protestant sense.
The Unity and Indissolubility of Marriage
The Christian View of Marriage and Divorce
The Scriptures. Marriage is discussed in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Beginning with Adam and Eve, a paradigm is presented, the substance of which is: “A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24). Jesus affirmed the Genesis paradigm when He responded to inquiring Pharisees, “Haven’t you read . . . that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate” (Matt. 19:4-6). The biblical view is ideally that of a single, permanent marriage.
Many times in Scripture (especially in the New Testament) an understanding of marriage can be ascertained through discussion of its opposite: divorce. The Old Testament contains eleven references to divorce.[17] The prophets usually used a divorce metaphor when inditing Israel for their idolatrous practices (i.e. Isa. 50:1, Jer. 3:1-8). Malachi 2:13-16 speaks of divorce amongst God’s people as a reason for His judgment upon them. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 shows clearly the simple manner in which a Jewish husband could dissolve a marriage, by simply writing his wife a certificate of divorce and sending her on her way. Moses permitted divorce, but did not command it. “Divorce is not part of the Creator’s perfect design. If Moses permitted it, he did so because sin can be so vile that divorce is to be preferred to continued ‘indecency.’ Divorce is never to be thought of as a God-ordained, morally neutral option but as evidence of sin, of hardness of heart.”[18]
The primary Synoptic Gospel passages that present the biblical view of divorce are Matthew 19:3-9 and Mark 10:2-12 (See also Matt. 5:31-32 and Luke 16:18). The Markan verses tell us that 1) the reason for legal divorces in the first place (See Deut. 24:1-4) was “hardness of heart,” and 2) the idea of divorce was not in the divine plan of creation. No justifiable grounds for divorce are discussed. Matthew includes the words, “except for marital unfaithfulness” (Matt. 19:9), allowing divorce for this one exception. This Matthean passage is the only place where the “unfaithfulness” exception exists. One commentator says of it, “One expression of the will of Christ is as authoritative and as satisfactory as a thousand repetitions could make it,”[19] and thus confirms the exception as legitimate. Luke’s audience (Luke 16:18) is told that divorce and remarriage constitute adultery, but nothing is said about divorcing and remaining single.
A word about cultural context is important at this point. One commentator says, “Jesus spoke a radical word to his listeners. They lived in a world in which women were treated as second-rate citizens at best. In Jewish society, women were at the mercy of their husbands, who were the only ones who could initiate a divorce.”[20] Two schools of Jewish thought existed at the time, one following Hillel (liberal) and one following Shammai (conservative); they were opposed on the subject of grounds for divorce. Hillel said men “could divorce their wives if they spoke too loudly in the house”[21] or if they could not cook. Shammai said that adultery was the only grounds for divorce. Jesus went much further than Shammai when He said that divorce was wrong because “It was not this way from the beginning” (Matt. 19:8). Jesus appealed to the creation account with his use of Genesis 2:24. He “appealed to the [rabbinic] principle ‘The more original the weightier’ . . . and it is impossible to go further back than creation for the responsibilities of mankind. If marriage is grounded in creation, in the way God has made us, then it cannot be reduced to a merely covenantal relationship that breaks down when the covenantal promises are broken.”[22]
A very interesting set of verses in the synoptic gospels discusses those who have “Left home or wife . . . for the sake of the kingdom of God” (Luke 18:29, see also Matt. 19:29, where some manuscripts include “wife” and Mk. 10:29, which does not include wives at all). Divorce is not mentioned in these verses, but simply “leaving.” The true meaning of these words is difficult to ascertain.
Paul spoke on the subjects of marriage, separation, and divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:10-16. Paul wrote in the context of the imminent return of Christ: Christians (specifically wives) are given permission to separate from their spouses (v. 11), but they should either remain single or be reconciled. Perhaps he based his understanding of “separating” upon Jesus’ words as recorded in Luke 18:29.
Thus, even in the most non-ideal circumstance, the general biblical view of marriage is that of a permanent single, monogamous relationship, which can possibly be broken by adultery.
The Historical Church. The Church and many church leaders throughout the centuries have held widely divergent views concerning marriage, divorce, and remarriage. The Church has seemingly spoken more overtly on the issue of divorce rather than marriage, and marriage itself has been historically looked down upon in deference to the “higher state” of celibacy (based primarily on Matt. 19:11-12 and 1 Cor. 7:7-8). Many early church leaders, including Ignatius, Justin, Tertullian, Origen, and later leaders such as Jerome, Augustine, and even John Calvin held celibacy and virginity in higher esteem than marriage.[23]
The Eastern Church, in general, held that divorce was permissible only in the case of adultery, and remarriage was allowed. The Western Church (i.e. the Roman church), however, viewed marriage as a sacrament, “indissoluble save for death.”[24] Origen allowed divorce on the grounds of adultery, and added “parricide, poisoning, and witchcraft”[25] and allowed remarriage. Tertullian and Ambrose also allowed for divorce in cases of adultery. Jerome admitted that “any number of successive marriages was not lawful.”[26] Augustine believed that the “Matthean exception could mean the right to remarriage after divorce for adultery.”[27]
The Reformers “agreed that divorce, with liberty for the innocent party to remarry, should be granted for adultery.”[28] John Calvin, although formally stating that only adultery could precipitate divorce, in practice “conceded three other grounds: impotence, extreme religious incompatibility, and desertion.”[29] Calvin also taught that Jesus’ law against remarriage did not apply to marriage dissolved for adultery. Martin Luther wrote about remarriage,
But I marvel even more that the Romanists do not allow remarriage of a man separated from his wife by divorce but compel him to remain single. Christ permitted divorce in case of fornication and compelled no one to remain single; and Paul preferred us to marry rather than to burn, and seemed quite prepared to grant that a man may marry another woman in place of the one he has repudiated.[30]
In the past few centuries, John Wesley has said, “It is adultery for any man to marry again . . . unless that divorce has been for the cause of adultery; in that only case there is no Scripture which forbids to marry again,”[31] and Charles Spurgeon said that “persons once married are in the sight of God, married for life, with the one exception of proven fornication.”[32]
The Church’s stance on marriage is that, in general, it should not be dissolved except (generally) in the case of adultery. The stance on remarriage has been varied throughout the history of the Church.
Modern Christian Writers. More recently, both liberal and conservative Christian authors have written on the subject of divorce. Some conservative authors attempt to sway husbands and wives away from divorce, telling their readers that divorce should not be considered an option, except possibly on the grounds of “fornication.”[33] Gordon Lindsay, writing in 1962, says, “Divorce or the termination of marriage is unnatural, disappointing, and usually tragic . . . [it] is rarely the solution to difficulties arising in marriage.”[34]
Conclusion
The marriage relationship is unique in Scripture because of the symbolic role it plays in the representation of God’s relationship with his people. The biblical writers emphasized certain values which they intended to be upheld in marriage: glory to God, commitment, love for one another, sexual exclusivity and purity, intimacy, open and loving communication, and God-ordained authority and roles.
Marriage appears to resemble the Old Testament idea of a covenant of parity between equal persons. The marriage relationship transcends the legal, contractual agreement made before civil authorities. As a covenant between humans representing the covenant relationship God makes with his people, the marriage is a permanent agreement.
Marriage in the Protestant sense (especially in reformed theology) is non-sacramental. Marriage is more closely aligned with a “means of grace” rather than the Roman Catholic understanding of activity ex opere operato. It is a means whereby God is able to give more salvific grace to his people.
Marriage was intended by God (in creation) to be an indissoluble relationship between husband and wife in which they are made “one flesh.” Divorce was never intended to be an option in marriage, as Jesus stated in Matthew 19:8. Jesus, however, made a concession in the case of “marital unfaithfulness” (Matt. 5:32). Divorce, then, is never “no-fault” as it is commonly designated in this society; it is the result of the sin of one or both partners.
References
Buck, Charles. A Theological Dictionary. W. W. Woodward, 1821.
Douglas, James D., Gen. Editor. The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.
Duty, Guy. Divorce and Remarriage. Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, Inc., 1967.
Gaebelein, Frank E. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Vol. 8. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.
Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. Vol. 3. London: James Clarke and Company LTD., 1960.
Kasper, Walter. Theology of Christian Marriage. New York: The Seabury Press, 1980.
Kittel, Gerhard, Editor. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Vol. 1, A-D. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1964.
LaSor, William S. et al. Old Testament Survey. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Com- pany, 1982.
Lindsay, Gordon. What the Bible Says About Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage. Dallas: The Voice of Healing Publishing Co., 1962.
Mace, David and Vera. The Sacred Fire: Christian Marriage through the Ages. Nashville: Abington Press, 1986.
Molldrem, Mark, J. “A Hermeneutic of Pastoral Care and the Law/Gospel Paradigm Applied to the Di- vorce Texts of Scripture.” Interpretation 45 (January, 1991): 43-54.
Norton, Peter B., President. The New Encyclopedia Britannica. Micropaedia, Vol. 7. Chicago: Ency- clopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1995.
[1] Peter B. Norton, President, The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Micropaedia, Vol. 7, (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1995), p. 871.
[2] Charles Buck, A Theological Dictionary, (W. W. Woodward, 1821), p. 341.
[3] James D. Douglas, gen. Editor, The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, Revised ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978), p. 633.
[4] Gerhard Kittel, editor, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 1, A-D., (Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1964), p. 656.
[5] Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, (London: James Clarke & Company LTD., 1960), p. 370.
[6] William S. LaSor et al., Old Testament Survey, (Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1982), p. 186.
[7] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), p. 376.
[8] Grudem, p. 466.
[9] LaSor, p. 184.
[10] Hodge, p. 376.
[11] Walter Kasper, Theology of Christian Marriage, (New York: The Seabury Press, 1980), p. 41.
[12] LaSor, p. 240.
[13] Grudem, p. 972.
[14] Grudem, p. 950.
[15] The Westminster Larger Catechism, Question 162.
[16] Kittel, p. 651.
[17] Mark J. Molldrem, “A Hermeneutic of Pastoral Care and the Law/Gospel Paradigm Applied to the Divorce Texts of Scripture,” Interpretation 45 (January, 1991): 45.
[18] Frank E. Gaebelein, editor, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 8 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), p. 413.
[19] Hodge, p. 392.
[20] Molldrem, p. 47.
[21] Molldrem, p. 47.
[22] Gaebelein, p. 412.
[23] Hodge, p. 371, 374.
[24] Guy Duty, Divorce and Remarriage, (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, Inc. 1967), p. 114.
[25] Molldrem, p. 48.
[26] T. D. Woolsey, Essay on Divorce and Divorce Legislation, in Duty, p. 115.
[27] Duty, p. 116.
[28] E. A. Westermarck, History of Human Marriage, in Duty, p. 114.
[29] Molldrem, p. 48.
[30] B. L. Woolf, Reformation Writings of Martin Luther, in Duty, p. 118.
[31] Robert W. Burtner and Robert E. Chiles, A Compend of Wesley’s Theology, in Duty, p. 120.
[32] Charles H. Spurgeon, Popular Exposition of Matthew, in Duty, p. 121.
[33] Gordon Lindsay, What the Bible Says About Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage, (Dallas: The Voice of Healing Publishing Co. 1962), p. 10.
[34] Lindsay, p. 1.
Thanks for the info