Mailbag: God took back unfaithful Israel; Are we obligated as well?

A wrote,

I am in the middle of divorce proceedings and I have not seen signs of repentence, and even so, know that I would not be required to stay.

I do have a question from my own heart. I was reading in Psalm 106:32-48 this morning and was struck at the unfaithfulness of Israel after God rescued them
Over and over and they still rebelled and were destroyed by their own sin. Then after that, God pitied them and listened to their cries and remembered his covenent with them, and relented because of His unfailing love. After that it’s more cries of save us Lord…Did Their cries represent repentence and that is why He relented? It says He remembered His covenant…am I still bound to my covenant even through my husband broke it?

That is the argument I hear from people still, or read about a ‘faithful saint who kept their covenant even though their spouse broke it’. I see Jesus giving adultery as a reason for divorce, talk if broken covenant, and here him relenting to the Israelites crying out to Him. I know God used divorcing Israel in Jeremiah in His Word too.

I don’t know what my question is really, maybe it is what does God require of us? If our spouse repents that would be an opportunity to consider reconciliaton but not requirement. If the covenant is broken, so we, as God uses His words here still need to keep the covenant We made? Or is this a different covenant, that He would bring a Saviour to the world to save them, and not the same as two humans in covenant together that has been broken by adultery?

Any insight into my somewhat confusing questions about this?

Dear A,

I am of the camp that God does not give us permission to sin. So, since God gives us permission to divorce a spouse who has committed adultery (see Matthew 19:9)–even if only once–then we are not sinning to exercise this God-given freedom as a faithful spouse.

I would add that the cheater’s response after cheating is irrelevant. God’s permission to divorce is not conditioned on whether or not the adulterous spouse repents.

To be clear:

If a cheater did not want this option in play, then the cheater ought to have remained true to his or her marriage vows. Plenty of spouses are. Cheaters chose to open themselves to this consequence when they lied and cheated.

As to Christians shaming faithful spouses using God’s example and other human examples, I would point out those examples are only exemplary if we assume the norm is divorce when a spouse cheats.

We do not praise someone for doing what is expected of them. The cashier who gives us our change is not praised for not stealing from us.

Also, it is important to pay attention to the context of what is happening in Psalm 106.

Generations of Jews suffered and died for their rebellious, adulterous sin before God relented. True, God did relent eventually. However, the people who died under His wrath prior to His relenting were effectively “divorced” because of their idolatrous adultery.

Christians in the “Never Divorce” camp often gloss over that context.

Generations of Jews suffered for their sins. A whole generation of Jews–minus Caleb and Joshua–died in the wilderness for rebelling against God. As far as they were concerned, God did NOT relent when it came to their justly deserved punishment.

As soon as mercy is presumed upon it is no longer mercy. It is entitlement.

Cheaters are not entitled to the mercy of avoiding a divorce. Christian faithful spouses are not obligated to remain in a marriage ravaged by adultery. God gives us permission to divorce.

Might a faithful spouse so great mercy and stay with a repentant cheater? Yes.

But the cheater MUST be repentant for this be a godly marriage. Plus, such staying ought to be understood as a GREAT mercy from the faithful spouse and NOT something the faithful spouse was obligated to do as a Christian. The faithful spouse is not so obligated as I read Scripture.

Hope that helps!

-DM