Honoring and Dishonoring Marriage – 5/5/24

In his new book entitled Troubled, Robert Kim Henderson describes what it was like growing up, bouncing from one foster home to the next. He was in nine different homes by the time he was eight years old. Even his name reminds him of his volatile childhood.

First name, Robert, is from his birth father, who abandoned his mother. He never met him. “Kim” is from his birth mother, who became addicted to drugs and moved back to Korea. “Henderson” is from his adopted father, who was divorced by his adopted mother, who then moved in with her lesbian lover. He was raised by his adopted mother and her partners, and his adopted father cut him off because he was mad at his adopted mother for leaving him.

He wrote later,

“Growing up switching families all the time and seeing all the divorces and separations and remarriage had furnished a few lessons about relationships; never get too attached to anyone, be prepared to walk away at a moment’s notice, and everyone is replaceable.”

He grew up experiencing waves of rage and anxiety and increasingly turned to alcohol and drugs. Things started to change when he joined the military at age 17. The structure and the discipline helped rein in his erratic thoughts and habits. But his heart was still full of rage and anxiety, and he ended up entering rehab for alcoholism.

Remarkably, when he was 23, he was able to get into Yale University on the GI bill. During those college years, he obtained research fellowships at schools like Stanford and eventually earned a doctorate in psychology from Cambridge University in England.

So, here’s a young man who has moved from his chaotic childhood and teen years at the bottom of the economic ladder (he often went to bed hungry growing up), and now he is in a world that many would consider the top of the economic ladder. Many of his classmates at Yale, for example, wore $900 jackets and didn’t think a thing about it. Many of them had never eaten at a fast-food restaurant in their lives.

One of the many contrasts that struck him between the world he grew up in and the world he was now existing in was what he began to call “luxury beliefs.” For example, many of his classmates at the time were calling for the defunding of the police. Rob knew they could hold on to that belief at no cost to themselves because many of them came from safe communities and could afford private security. But he knew the crime-ridden communities that he grew up in would be absolutely devastated by a shrinking police presence.

He gives several other examples, but he mainly focuses in on one big example of a luxury belief, and it’s called marriage. He tells of a classmate at Yale who boldly announced to him

“monogamy is kind of outdated [and not good for society.”

When he asked her about her family background and if she planned to be married, Rob explained,

“She said she came from an affluent family, was raised by both her parents, and that, yes, she personally intended to have a monogamous marriage— but quickly added that marriage shouldn’t have to be for everyone. She was raised in a stable two-parent family, just like the vast majority of our classmates. And she planned on getting married herself. But she insisted that traditional families are old-fashioned, and that society should ‘evolve’ beyond them.”

Interesting. A “luxury belief.” She could afford to reject marriage for society—viewing it as old-fashioned, not good—but she could not afford to reject it for herself. In other words, she wanted to be viewed as open-minded and tolerant, but she knew she wanted something better for her children.

She represents a sizable group of academic and media elites who, in the words of sociologist Brad Wilcox, talk left, walk right. Talk left about social political issues, walk right in their own lives about social and political values. They’re guilty of what Wilcox calls an “inverted hypocrisy.” They refuse to “preach what they practice.”

In his new book entitled Get Married, Wilcox tells stories of highly influential people like Reed Hastings, who is the co-founder of Netflix and its executive chairman. In his professional role, Hastings has overseen the production of many anti-marriage shows and movies, like “Marriage Story.” But in his private life, he has gone to great lengths, even pursuing marriage counseling to establish a three-decade-long marriage so that his children can have a stable, loving home.

So, while marriage among the elite continues to be strong, marriage in America has plummeted by 60% in 50 years. According to the 2019 American Community Survey— this adults ages 18 to 55 who are currently married. Look at the contrast between classes of people. If you look at the red, the upper middle class, 60% of them are married. If you look at the blue, the working class, 40%. If you look at the poor, 20%. The very rich are not included. They’re over 80%. So, while marriage rates plummet in most demographics, they’re strong among the very wealthy.

This assault on marriage generally in our country is not limited to one side of the political aisle, even though political conservatives tend to more often marry and are happier in their marriages than their liberal counterparts. Some of the strongest voices against marriage come from the far right manosphere. Voices like Andrew Tate, who has more than 12 billion views on TikTok alone and is adamantly against marriage. Tate claims,

“The problem is, there is zero advantage to marriage in the Western world for a man… If you use your mind, if you use your head instead of your heart, and you look at the advantages to getting married, there are absolutely none.”

He goes on to make clear that women are to be sexually enjoyed but not trusted. Don’t commit to one. Now imagine this man is influencing young men across the world on the opposite side of the gender and political aisle. You have headlines on Bloomberg, like

“women who stay single and don’t have kids are getting richer.”

The article highlights women who set aside marriage and family, focus on their career and themselves, end up super happy, super rich. The message to young women is, if you want to become poor and live as a ball and chain kind of relationship, unhappy, get married. If not, reject marriage. Women like this generally view marriage as patriarchal, oppressive, they celebrate alternative lifestyles like cohabitation or polyamory.

The surprising thing about all this, these voices against marriage, is they are lying. To show you this, I’m going to repeat some statistics. But be careful. These are just statistics, okay? But guess who the happiest women in America are? Married with children. Happiest men? Married with children. Wealthiest women? Married with children. Wealthiest men? Married with children. Less depression. Less anxiety (except on road trips with your kids). More meaning. More fulfillment. So, the data is super clear.

You say, why does this matter? Like, are you saying everybody has to get married or they’re less of a person? No. What I’m trying to highlight is young people are being lied to. The reason this bothers me so much is the people who pay the price for these lies are children and the poor— the most vulnerable among us.

Doctor Wilcox, a sociologist at the University of Virginia, ends his book this way:

“The failure of our ruling class to lend cultural and economic support to marriage and family life in these communities [specifically the poor and the working class] is a big reason why children, men, and women in them are much more likely to end up immiserated [that is, miserable, impoverished], incarcerated, uneducated, and unhappy today… In a nation where marriage is flourishing, men and women are more likely to welcome new life, keeping fertility at a sustainable level. In such a nation, the loss of life to the twin scourges of suicide and homicide are kept to a minimum. In such a nation, there is less need for a state that spoils, superintend, and spends to excess, and more opportunities for citizens to enjoy their liberty and exercise their independence… But ours is not such a nation right now, and too many of our citizens are paying a high price for marriage’s falling fortune, especially the most vulnerable.”

Now, Doctor Wilcox is writing as a sociologist. Very informative. But we, the people of God, need to hear the voice of Jesus. What does Jesus say about marriage? How does Jesus view marriage?

Jesus has an intriguing relationship with marriage. As a couple of you may remember, in a wedding I did last week, I talked about how Jesus views marriage in three ways: he minimizes it, he maximizes it, and he epitomizes it. He epitomizes meaning. He ultimately is the point of marriage. We’re not going to have time to deal with that today. Let me talk quickly about how he minimizes and maximizes.

He minimizes marriage, obviously, because he lived his entire life as a single man on earth. He never got married. He never had sex. He never had his own children. He lived a fulfilled, joyful, FOMO-free life as a single man. So, anyone who tries to make marriage ultimate, like an end in itself, Jesus will pop that balloon.

He did it to the Sadducees in Matthew 22 when they try to elevate marriage. Jesus brings it down. If you idolize marriage as a single person, you will be miserable when you’re single, and you will be miserable when you’re married because we worship Jesus, not marriage. So, in that sense, Jesus brings it down.

Before we go on, I want to take a moment to have a family chat on singleness. Because anytime someone addresses the social significance of marriage, it can leave singles feeling like second-class citizens. And that is not the case! A healthy church like ours is made up of healthy singles and married. But I do want to challenge our life groups to be the kind of places where both married and singles can talk candidly about the joys and struggles of marriage and the joys and struggles of singleness. In order to do that (this is where we’re going to have to do two things at the same time), we have to refuse to categorize people.

When we put a label on someone, “oh, you’re single,” what does that mean? We have people, many in our church, who are singles and feel called to singleness, and they don’t want their life group members playing matchmaker on them. They don’t want their life group members treating them like their life is at a truck stop waiting for the next rig to go by. That is not it. They don’t want to be a single in a singles group that functions as a meat market. That is not helpful at all. Can I hear an amen from the singles?

However, having said that, there are many singles in our church—and I’ve talked to many of them—who would appreciate a little help. Hinge is not easy. EHarmony is a pain. But how do you do that? If you’re in a group, let’s say, for example, with single women and married women, and at times, most of those groups gather just as women or just as men. It takes great sensitivity to have the kind of conversation— and a lot of trust because you always have an awkward member in your group who’s going to say something unhelpful. Leaders, play goalie. But how beautiful it is—and the reason I can talk about this with optimism is because it’s already happening—how beautiful it is when, for example, this group of women (married and singles) can gather together. How can we pray for you? They get to know one another. They’re doing life together. And so, you know what is helpful because you’re talking about what is helpful. You know what one might find encouraging and what another might not. And you’re listening to one another and praying for one another. And if you, as a married woman, know a really sharp single guy and you know this woman in your life group, and you feel like, “Hey, you guys should really pray.” And the married woman’s husband might go put the guy in a headlock. No, no. Might encourage. Okay, you get the point. We’re in this together.

The key is this: if marriage is not a god, if singleness is not a god, but a gift, as marriage is a gift— singleness is a gift, not a God. In other words, bring it down. Put it in its right place. Singles and married, we’re all in this together to finish the race in purity for the glory of God. We need each other to do that. Our struggles may be different, but in many ways, they’re the same. So, we’re able to communicate with one another and be honest with one another. Not viewing one another as heading in a different direction or at odds with one another. So much more I could say about that. Jesus minimizes marriage.

Secondly, Jesus maximizes marriage. His first miracle was at a what? A wedding. Jesus reacts against anyone who will idolize marriage and anyone who will trivialize marriage. As Max read earlier, Matthew 19:4. Let’s look at this again. These are the words of Jesus,

“Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

This is Jesus, a single man honoring marriage in its appropriate place. Not idolizing. Not trivialize.

He is echoing Hebrews 13:4,

“Let marriage be held in honor among all [all: singles, divorcees, widows, married], and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.”

It’s for this reason—Jesus honored marriage appropriately—that he introduces this topic as case study number three, as he is fulfilling the law and showing us what does a kind of righteousness look like that exceeds the superficial appearance righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees?

Case study number three (Matthew 5:31-32). Jesus makes two big points. One, your interpretation dishonors marriage. Verse 31, dishonors marriage,

“It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’”

Jesus is here referring to the rabbinical interpretation of Deuteronomy 24:1 that reads this way:

“When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce”

Here’s the debate: it hinges on the word “indecency.” What does that mean? There were two major views or schools of interpretation in that day. First of all, the school of Shammai (that permitted divorce for infidelity) interpreted that word “indecency” as a moral indecency. I would agree with that. If the husband finds out his wife has been unfaithful. But the School of Hillel permitted divorce for any reason, and this is the interpretation that had become popular in Jesus’ day and had devastating consequences on the integrity of marriage and the dignity of women.

Divorce was only permitted for husbands (they could divorce, the wife couldn’t), and the husband could divorce for things like—and they’re actually described in The Mishnah—burning the food, speaking to another man, being infertile, changing the channel in the middle of the big game… This double standard obviously had horrific consequences on the well-being of women and Jesus, as we’re about to see, is going to right that wrong. But before we see that, I just want to observe that things in the ancient world were horribly skewed in the favor of men. But what’s interesting is our culture often writes a wrong by creating another wrong.

You get a little glimpse, maybe— we only have time to tease out these statistics, but today, two-thirds of all divorces are initiated by women. Even infidelity is—not in a huge way—but in a way is viewed differently by Americans if it’s done by a man or done by a woman. For example, 66% of Americans say it’s always wrong for a husband to have an affair. 55% say it’s always wrong for a wife to have an affair. That’s curious. First of all, why aren’t both of those 100%? And then secondly, why do we give the benefit of the doubt more often to women than men? Great question. But as we tend to do today, we are writing an injustice by often swinging toward more injustice. Jesus is not interested in jumping on the pendulum of partiality. He says, point number one, your interpretation dishonors marriage.

Second point he makes is my instruction honors marriage. Verse 32, honors marriage,

“But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

Overall, Jesus is simply emphasizing the permanence of marriage, the integrity of the marriage covenant. He is saying, as we saw in Matthew 19, God’s design for marriage is permanent. “What God has joined together, let not man put [asunder or] separate.”

Jesus, again, is filling up the law and showing us what real righteousness looks like. In this section, he does this three ways.

Number one, Jesus goes for the heart. The scribes and Pharisees were using a legal document to cover up their unfaithful hearts. How did they do that? Well, if you confronted one of them about divorcing their spouse, they would have responded, “But I gave her a certificate of divorce,” which in the ancient world was above and beyond. Men could just abandon their spouse. Women couldn’t return the favor in that day, but men could. If the woman was not given a certificate of divorce, then she couldn’t legally remarry, which often gave her two horrible options: one, starvation. Two, prostitution. And so, the Pharisees and scribes were proud of themselves, “For we would never abandon our spouse without giving a certificate of divorce, because we are so righteous.” Jesus is saying, no, let’s look at your unfaithful hearts. You can’t cover up a violation of a covenant with a certificate of divorce. You’ve broken covenant. God sees the unfaithfulness, not just the document you’re using to try to justify it.

Second, Jesus makes clear that marital infidelity violates the integrity of the covenant. This is why the offended spouse has the option (not the obligation, the option) of divorce. Jesus is essentially saying you are allowed to legally formalize what adultery has morally pulverized.

Third, Jesus warns that unbiblical divorce and remarriage multiplies sin. If she remarries, she commits adultery. Verse 32,

“Whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

In other words, unbiblical divorce leads to unbiblical remarriage.

Now, connected to this, there are hundreds of other questions that flow from that that there’s no way we can unpack today. We will come back to this later in Matthew 19, but if you have specific questions about where our church stands, I would encourage you to check out this QR code. You’ll see on this our church’s statement on sexuality, marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Feel free to go there. Read that document, and then please, if you have lingering questions— both about what we teach and, more personally, like, how does this affect my situation? Like, where does this leave me as an individual? All of these situations vary, but we desire, as your shepherds, to be able to walk through this with you. So, if you have questions, struggles, please don’t wrestle through it alone. We would be happy to sit down with you, one of the pastors or elders, and walk through how we can apply what can feel like an overwhelming teaching to my personal situation. Let’s end with two key questions.

Number one, what is the connection between Jesus’ first three case studies on righteousness? Two weeks ago, we talked about anger. Last week, we talked about lust. Today, we’re talking about divorce and adultery. Is there any connection? Did Jesus just pull these out of the air? I want to suggest some really tight connections between these three case studies on a practical level. Let’s start with the first two, anger and lust.

Some of you who have been around here for a while have heard me say before: “anger can make the bed, lust lies in it.” There is a tight connection between anger and lust. For example, a young woman who retains resentment in her heart toward her father is statistically more likely to have premarital sex or pursue an alternative lifestyle. Anger makes the bet; lust lies in it. A young man who feels disrespected or neglected by women is far more likely to pursue porn.

Our society’s infatuation with perverted forms of sensuality are often expressions of this symbiotic relationship between anger and lust. Why else would a book like 50 Shades of Gray sell by the millions and then become a trilogy of film series during the MeToo movement? Huh? Where millions and millions of men and women are entertained by this merging of anger, bondage, lust all converging. By the way, I’ve not seen the movies or read the book. It just doesn’t take a lot of intelligence to know what they’re about.

The combination of animosity, anger, and fantasy are tightly connected to adultery and divorce. If I hold resentment in my heart toward my wife, and then I go to work, and I’m shocked: “this woman at work is so kind. And she’s so thoughtful. And she gets me. My wife doesn’t get me like she gets me.” You can see the connection. That lingering resentment makes us open to fantasy. I wonder what it would be like to be married to someone who’s really nice? And we imagine this something and someone that leads to adultery, that leads to divorce. There is a link between anger, lust, divorce, remarriage. Anger often dresses up lust to look like love when it’s not. Resentment can’t tell the difference between lust and love. So, when we’re holding resentment in our heart, we’re far more vulnerable to enter into a relationship that is not built on love. But love and lust become murky. And so, one of the greatest antidotes is gratefulness because gratefulness strips the mask off lust and reveals it for what it really is for both single and married.

Final question: what if I’ve messed up? What if I’ve been unfaithful? What if I’ve ended a marriage unbiblically. What if I’ve remarried unbiblically? Am I going to wear a permanent tattoo of unfaithfulness? In light of these questions, I think it’s important to be reminded of the broader context in which Jesus’ words fell. Some of us have this delusion that the words of Jesus back then would have been welcomed, but today, things are a little dicey. It’s not true. Let me just give you an example.

The Greek orator Demosthenes, writing a couple hundred years before Jesus, wrote this:

“We [and he’s talking about men] have heterai [that’s a word that refers to concubines or courtesans] for pleasure, female slaves for our daily care [which is a sexual euphemism], and wives to give us legitimate children and to be guardians of our households.”

This Demosthenes is the ancient form of Andrew Tate. For men, he’s essentially saying sex is all about entertainment, even predatorial, and marriage is merely utilitarian. Imagine the Gospel of Jesus entering that context. Jesus saying, “the husband is to die for his wife like I died for the church. The wife to line up under the husband like the church lines up under me. The husband and the wife are to keep pure, both of them, to one another. Not a different standard for men, not a different standard for women, both of them. And sexual intimacy is limited to the marriage.” That was explosive in that world. That was controversial in that world. The same reaction you’ll get from college friends when trying to describe this to them today is even greater in Jesus’s day.

The reason that this is so important for us to understand is the people who were first hearing the words of Jesus, like many of us are listening to these words today, we’re scandalized by these words. Listen to Glenn Scribner:

“In the ancient world, the gods were violent rapists, sexual agency was solely in the hands of powerful men, and sexual misbehavior consisted in the violation of reputations, not of bodies or wills [like, nobody even questioned whether adultery was wrong for men or sleeping around for singles was a problem]. Into this world came the Christian revolution, where sex is painted on the canvas of divine romance and where two equals unite in a sacred and unbreakable bond.”

Imagine how restricting and liberating this message was.

Imagine this message falling on a group of Corinthians, or really a group of people from anywhere. This is why Paul when he addressed this topic, said in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10,

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived”

Just like today, online, you will find teachers who will say it really doesn’t matter what you do with your body. Jesus is fine with that. That’s not what Jesus said. That’s not what Paul says.

“do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

If you were untouched by all of those, you’re not being honest.

Paul is clearly bringing us all to the place where we hear the words of Jesus and hear, oh, that’s what a righteousness looks like that exceeds the scribes and Pharisees. But he doesn’t stop there. Verse 11, very next verse,

“And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified [set apart], you were justified [you were declared right with God when you hadn’t done anything to deserve it] in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the spirit of our God.”

Jesus makes clear, I didn’t just come to point out the problem. I came to bring a solution. I came to expose sin, yes, but to transform hearts. And by the power of the gospel, my death, burial and resurrection to make you new so that you can say, “That’s who I was, but by God’s grace, I don’t wear that anymore. That’s not who I am.”

There are many who view an unbiblical divorce or an unbiblical remarriage as like “the unpardonable sin,” and they’re haunted. And I just want to say, as strong as Jesus’s words are against divorce and adultery and unbiblical marriage, his grace is more abounding. If you carry that shame, then God has a word for you today: I forgive you through Jesus. Will you look to Jesus? Will you see that it is his righteousness, not ours? And then realize he is transforming me. He’s not throwing my past in my face. He is making us a new people who honor singleness and marriage appropriately in the way we love and live.

I am so thankful that we have so many people in our church who grew up in utter chaos. Like the example I gave at the beginning, Rob Henderson. Home to home and instability. By God’s grace, you’ve—because God’s opened your eyes—said, not anymore! This stops here. Not that there aren’t residual challenges, but by God’s grace, I am not going to continue to pass chaos on to the next generation. It stops. That’s one of the things the gospel does. It transforms us from the inside out, and then it begins to transform the way we think about our singleness and our marriage and our relationships to one another. Our thought life. Our desires.

We want to respond to this word of Jesus by remembering his broken body and his shed blood. If you are a follower of Jesus, please partake. The Bible just gives two qualifications to partake. Will you partake thankfully? Jesus broke the bread and gave thanks. Your faith is in Jesus, not in yourself. Will you respond thankfully and thoughtfully? As 1 Corinthians 11 says, don’t disregard your brothers and sisters. If you’re holding resentment towards someone, make that right. If you’re thinking you’re better, as 1 Corinthians 11 describes, because you have more than someone else, then make that right. We are a family. We’re in this together. And so, I’m going to pray, and then some people are going to come up, and they’re going to pass out a little piece of broken bread (it is gluten-free for those who need that) and then a cup of juice. And we will have time as Max and the band sing over us to pray, to search our hearts, to give things over to God. And then I’ll come back up and we’ll partake together.

Father, thank you for your word. It is a strong word. It is an immovable word. It is a countercultural word. It is a word our nation needs to hear. And we thank you for speaking it to us. And we pray that we would respond not by looking at ourselves but by looking to Jesus. Turn your eyes upon Jesus. And Lord, you wash us clean. You fill us with hope. You pour your spirit into us so that we have wisdom to know how to move forward. We thank you for this time. In Jesus’ name, amen.