If it can be established that Jesus married Israel it could be very insightful for those seeking the truth regarding whether or not the Bible teaches that the divorced must remain celibate. If Christ married Israel, whom God married but divorced (Jer. 3:8, 14), then this divine example teaches us that a divorced person is not required to remain celibate.
The Text
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. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
Romans 7:1-4
While it is true that the word “Israel” is not found in the above text, when we consider what the text does say, along with other teachings in both the Old and New Testaments, we find abundant reason to conclude that Jesus did indeed marry Israel. Actually, that Christ married Israel is a well-established fact, one that virtually no one would seek to deny in formal debate. Unfortunately, many are not able to accept it and this is to their own hurt as well as those they influence. No matter how clearly a thing may be stated, or how much evidence supports a doctrine, in order for us to see it we have to be able to see beyond our preconceptions and look at the evidence with open eyes and ears. But seeing the truth is not the end of the battle; we must apply the truth regardless of feared earthly consequences.
What the Text Does Not Say
Before we discuss what the text says let us observe some ideas it does not convey: 1) It does not say divorce does not end a marriage—divorce ended God’s marriage with Israel, therefore it is imprudent to conclude that Paul now teaches a different doctrine; 2) it does not declare that a divorced person must remain celibate; 3) it does not express anything contrary to God’s definition of divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1,2; Jeramiah 3:8); and 4) it does not state that only death ends a marriage. Those who would like to use this text to support their teaching that the divorced may not marry are hit with the reality that it teaches too much. If the text teaches that only death ends a marriage it excludes divorce even in the case of adultery that is asserted to be essential before God will recognize it as valid.
In view of the fact that the first three verses of the passage under study (Romans 7:1-3) has often been used in an effort to teach that the divorced may not marry, it may be surprising to the reader that the same text, when verse 4 is included in context, actually teaches the opposite. Indeed, verse 4 is very plain language teaching, by divine example, that a divorced person may marry another. What could be more authoritative and clear teaching than for God to use Himself and His Own wife, by way of divine example, to teach us that divorce ends a marriage and the divorced may marry?
What the Text Says
Let’s now take a close look at the text (Romans 7:1-4). Numerous times I’ve seen brethren use verses 1-3 to support their belief and practice on MDR, but to determine truth we must consider context. Stopping at verse 3 and ignoring verse 4 is not good hermeneutics. It is not even honest. If verse 4 actually teaches what it appears to say then it soundly defeats the traditional position that the divorced must remain celibate.
Beginning in verse one, Paul clarifies whom he is addressing: “those who know the law.” This would be the Israelites whom the Scriptures speak of as being the wife of God, but whom He divorced (Jeramiah 3:8, 14) and whom are now married to Christ. This is very important because of what is said in verse 4 of the passage. Now, God was not married to the people as individuals; as individuals they were spiritually married to God. We might say He was married to them as a corporate entity. This is the same group who may become the bride of Christ (“married to another”).
Notice verse 2a:
“For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth;…”
As long as a woman is married to a man she is bound to him, but if she is divorced from him she does not have “an husband,” which means she is no longer bound to him. He has “loosed” her already. (On the word “loosed” see 1 Cor. 7:27, 28). Otherwise, she is bound to him until death. Death looses her from him. To insist that verse 2b teaches that only death ends a marriage is to deny that divorce does what God intended it to do no matter what are the circumstances.
Verse 2b:
“…but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.”
There is nothing here that anyone denies. But the contention that only death ends a marriage is very much in dispute as it denies that divorce does what God intended it to do. We must not read into this passage something that is not there.
Verse 3:
“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.”
If while married to one man a woman marries another man she “shall be called an adulteress.” (This is what would take place if a man sent a woman away—refusing to give her a certificate of divorce. The man who married her would also commit adultery. See Matt. 5:31, 32.) We have observed in comments on verse two that if divorced she is not married; thus if a divorced woman marries another the above condemnation would not be applicable. It is only applicable if she is married. Nevertheless, if married to a man who dies death does free her, according to Paul. (Some cultures have buried a man’s wives with him.) Upon Christ’s death the Jews were then freed from the Law to marry another—Christ.
Some have asserted that my usage of Jeremiah 3:8, 14 and Romans 7:4 is a misuse of scripture and that I have taken it out of context. Both charges are obviously false. In Jeremiah 3:8 and 14 the application is marriage–the marriage between God and Israel. This established to whom Israel was married. In Romans 7:4, marriage is the application but it is to another person in the godhead–Jesus. While it is true that the context involves law and covenant relations this does not discount the fact of the marriage of God and Israel. Isn’t it strange that over the years some brethren have used verses 1-3 of Romans 7 to make an argument about MDR while ignoring the context, which is Israel’s now being allowed to marry Christ, but I am accused of misapplying verse 4 when I use it in its proper context?
Dealing with Responses
The most common response to the teachings presented above is to merely ignore verse 4 and put emphasis on verse 2b. But, as in algebra, if you leave out part of the equation you will not get the correct answer.
Some deemphasize to whom the text is addressed. For example, it might be said “WE are allowed to be married to another because the Old Law is now dead to us.” But instead of it being dead to us it is us that are dead to it. Barclay ( Romans , p95) said,
"Paul could still have put the thing quite simply. He could have said that we were married to the law; that the law was killed by the work of Christ; and that now we are free to be married to God. But, quite suddenly, he puts it the other way, and, in his suddenly changed picture, it is we who die to the law."
With emphasis on the word “we” it becomes about “us” gentiles whom were not previously married to Christ. Again I remind the reader whom Paul addressed: “those who know the law” (Israelites). Gentiles never were under the Law or married to God. Paul is teaching that those who were under the Law (those who knew the Law) are allowed to be married to “another.” This context clearly indicates there was a “previous” marriage. That this marriage was between Israel and God is undeniable. Yet it is true that both Jew and gentile are baptized into one body—the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13) and make up the bride of Christ, the Israel of God, the church.
It is argued that “The church is ’spiritual’ Israel.” Well, call it what you like, it is still Israel—the true children of God. Since all the spiritual promises to Israel are realized in the church the church is the new Israel that was previously married to God but after divorced married to Jesus.
Supporting Passages
Galatians 6:16
“And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”
Barnes comments: “And upon the Israel of God. The true church of God; all who are his true worshippers. See [Ro 2:28]; See [Ro 2:29]; See [Ro 9:6].”
Revelation 21:2
“And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.”
Jerusalem was the holy city of Israel, God’s wife. In this text is depicted the “bride” (the church), the new Israel, and Christ the husband. National Israel typified and foreshadowed the spiritual Israel of God that was to become the eternal bride of Christ.
Galatians 3:26-29
“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
We, both Jew and Gentile, are of Abraham’s seed that make up the church. Israelites (Abraham’s seed) were previously married to God. Now, these same people are married to Jesus when “baptized into Christ.”
Below are Some Comments from Respected Scholars that Relate to Romans:
Hank Hanegraaff’s Comments:
“The faithful remnant of Old Testament Israel and New Testament Christianity are together the one genuine seed of Abraham and thus heirs according to the promise. This remnant is not chosen on the basis of religion or race but rather on the basis of relationship to the resurrected Redeemer.”
“Finally, the one chosen people, who form one covenant community, are beautifully symbolized in the book of Romans as one cultivated olive tree (see Romans 11:11–24). The tree symbolizes Israel; its branches symbolize those who believe; and its root symbolizes Jesus—the root and the offspring of David (Revelation 22:16). Natural branches broken off represent Jews who reject Jesus. Wild branches grafted in represent Gentiles who receive Jesus. Thus says Paul, “Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children….In other words, it is not the natural children who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring” (Romans 9:6–8). Jesus is the one genuine seed of Abraham! And all clothed in Christ constitute one congruent chosen covenant community connected by the cross.”
Hank Hanegraaff, Christian Research Institute. http://www.equip.org/articles/does-the-bible-make-a-distinction-between-israel-and-the-church/
Joseph Benson’s Commentary on the Old and New Testament
That ye should be married to another — (2 Corinthians 11:2;) so that you must now give up yourselves to Christ, as your second husband, that you may be justified by faith in him. The apostle speaks of Christ as the husband of the believing Jews, because he was now become their Lord and head; and he calls him another husband, because they had been formerly, as it were, married to the Mosaic law, and relied on that alone for salvation.
Bryan Vinson, SR. (p. 128)
We become dead to the law by reason of it abrogation, that is, the Jews did, for they only were ever subject it, married to it and thus bound by it.
(I do not agree with Vinson that Israel was married to the Law. They were married to God. Jeramiah 3:14, R.W.)
Coffman Commentaries on the Bible
For Jewish Christians, Christ died to annul their old contract with God; thus they were free to be united with Christ as a portion of his bride the church, this being the import of the words, "that ye should be joined to another."
Geneva Bible Footnotes
2. An application of the similitude of marriage. "So", he says, "it is the same with us: for now we are joined to the Spirit, as it were to the second husband, by whom we must bring forth new children: we are dead with regard to the first husband, but with regard to the latter, we are as it were raised from the dead."
Romans: Verse by Verse (Newell)
To the Jewish believer, then, the announcement is now directly made that he was made dead to the Law through the body of Christ, in order to be to Another, to the risen Christ, thus to bring forth fruit to God; and that he has been [verse 6] discharged from the Law [literally, an- nulled with respect to the Law], thus bringing him out into service in newness of spirit.(1) This was the startling announcement made to those who, for 1500 years had known nothing but the Law: they had died to it all; the Law knew them no more.
FBN
By the body of Christ; by his crucified body making expiation for your sins. Thus ye are released from the law as a means of justification before God, so that ye are no longer in this respect bound to it, any more than a woman is bound to her husband after he is dead. Thus the way is prepared that ye should be married to another, even Christ; in other words, should come into a state of justification by virtue of your union with Christ through faith.
GIL
they are loosed from it, and may be, and are lawfully married to Christ,
PNTC
Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are dead to the law. This principle, under the figure of marriage, is applied to those church members who were once under the law of Moses. They were then related to it as a wife to a husband. But in the chapter VI. it has been shown that all disciples of Christ had died, been buried, and risen with him (Ro 6:2-5); hence, having died, they had been released from the law. As new creatures, they could, as those freed from the marriage to law, be espoused to another, even Christ. Christians are so united to Christ, living by vital union with him, being found in him, that whatever was done to him is said to have been done to them in his person, or through his body. The church is spiritually the Body of Christ [1Co 12:27].
Conclusion
In view of the apparent fact that God’s wife (that became unfaithful and whom God therefore divorced) was allowed to marry, who can argue against the idea that we are taught through divine example to allow the divorced to marry? Add this teaching to what Paul says regarding the “unmarried” (that includes those divorced) — “LET THEM MARRY” — and we have a solid reason to reject the idea that Jesus was talking about legal divorce when He said a woman “put away” (but not divorced) commits adultery in marrying another. Apparently He was talking about permanent separations (wherein the woman was not given a certificate of divorce, as Moses commanded, Deuteronomy 24:1-4; Mark 10:3) that logically would result in sin should the woman marry another. If the traditional teaching that “put away” means legal divorce is true then we are left to conclude that Jesus did not even deal with the more evil issue of men (who could have more than one wife) sending away a wife but not giving her a certificate of divorce “so she may go and be another man’s wife.” Actually, in Marks account it is made clear that the adultery committed in “putting away” was a nonsexual act—it was “against her” rather than “with” a new wife (Mark 10:11).
The first three verses of Romans 7 state what the married woman’s situation was under the law. She was bound to her husband by that law until he died—at least as long as she was married to him. Verse 4 states what the situation of New Testament Israel is after the cross. This also is specifically stated in the text. They are dead to that law, free from it, in order that they might be married to another, specifically Christ. Words could not say this any more plainly.
The bottom line is that if the traditional theory (from Catholicism that does not accept that divorce ends marriage) is correct then the Jews who obey the gospel are living in spiritual adultery with Christ.
Articles for additional study:
http://www.totalhealth.bz/divorce-and-remarriage-romans-7-4-meaning.htm
http://www.totalhealth.bz/divorce-and-remarriage-romans-7-exegesis.htm
http://www.zianet.com/maxey/reflx106.htm
http://www.freedomsring.org/ftc/chap17.html
