[BBC List] divorce and remarriage

[Mike Abendroth]

John MacArthur Jr

 


Proposals Regarding the Scriptural Teaching on Divorce & Remarriage


 

1.	Because of the sacredness of marriage and the seriousness of
covenant vows, all biblical means should be exhausted to keep any marriage
together (cf. 1 Cor. 7:12; 1 Pet. 3:1-2; Matt. 18:15-17). The believer
should never consider divorce except in specific circumstances and even in
those circumstances it should only be pursued reluctantly because there is
no other recourse.

 

2.	If sexual immorality, other sin, or even separation occurs in a
marriage, but reconciliation to a monogamous, cohabitant relationship is
possible, then the faithful partner should forgive and reconcile (cf. Luke
17:3-4; Matt. 5:23-24). Reconciliation after divorce is not possible when
one partner remains an unbeliever (cf. 2 Cor. 6:14ff; 1 Cor. 7:39), but it
is a necessary fruit of repentance when two believers have been divorced
(crf. Mal. 2:13-16; Matt. 5:32).

 

3.	If the unbeliever leaves the marital relationship permanently but is
not willing to file for divorce, perhaps because of lifestyle,
irresponsibility, or to avoid monetary obligations, then the believer is in
an impossible situation of having legal and moral obligations that he or she
cannot fulfill. Because "the brother or sister is not under bondage in such
cases" (1 Cor. 7:15) and is therefore no longer obligated to remain married,
the believer may file for divorce without fearing the displeasure of God.

 

4.	One married and divorced prior to his identification with Christ and
the church should be considered to be "abiding in that condition in which he
was called," meaning that he is free to remain single or marry another
believer (1 Cor. 7:20, 24; cf. 2 Cor. 5:16-17). Such a person cannot
reconcile to an unsaved former spouse, nor is he obligated to make
restitution for every sin committed prior to his conversion.

 

5.	In cases where an unbiblical divorce has taken place in a single
believer's past, then the leaders of the church should help that person to
repent and "unscramble the egg" according to biblical principles (cf. Heb.
13-17; Matt. 18:18). If true repentance has taken place and no
reconciliation is possible with the former spouse, then the forgiven
believer could pursue another relationship under the supervision of the
church.

 

6.	In cases where a married person has divorced and remarried
unbiblically, the answer is confession and repentance and then continuing in
his current marriage according to biblical principles. He is bound to the
obligation of the covenant made with the new spouse.

 

7.	Remarriage is permitted for the faithful partner only when the
divorce was on biblical grounds. In fact, the purpose for a biblical divorce
is to make clear that the faithful partner is free to remarry, but only in
the Lord (Rom. 7:1-3; 1 Cor. 7:3). 

 

 

2003 Shepherds' Conference, A Ministry of Grace Community Church
818.909.5530.  C 2003 All Rights Reserved. Grace Community Church. A CD,
MP3, or tape cassette copy of this session can be obtained by going to
<http://www.shepherdsconference.org/> www.shepherdsconference.org 

 

Till Death Do Us Part 

A Biblical Look at Divorce and Remarriage 
by
Bill Shannon

Seminar Session #1020

A. Problems Today

Gentlemen, if I were to ask you the question, "What is the percentage of
divorce in your area?" Most of you will probably say, among non-Christians:
50%, right? If I was to ask you what is the divorce rate for Christians,
what would it be? 50%? Well, that's the statistics that have come out. When
I was asked to and when I actually chose to do this, I thought I'd go and
check out the statistics. And so I went on truthorfiction.com. And I found
some divorce statistics. And hopefully, gentlemen, you can see what our
society tries to do-they inflate divorce. Why does society inflate divorce
or the numbers of people that get divorced? So people don't get married;
they cohabitate and everything is justified because then they don't have a
divorce. But here are some statistics-some real statistics. This is a
fascinating piece of misinformation that is so respected that it is quoted
without arbitration by some of the best authors, broadcasters and writers.
Marriage is a lot of hard work and people are putting that work into it and
don't need to be discouraged with the untrue burden that hangs over their
head: that their relationship is doomed to not survived by the chance of
50%. The error has resulted from various misreadings of the statistics. I'm
going to give you some of those here. 

One is to compare the number of marriages in a given year to the number of
divorces in a given year. It is true that in any given year there are twice
as many marriages as divorces. If in your state or your county there were
100 marriages last year, there were 50 divorces-it would seem at first
glance. That would be half of the marriages were ending in divorce. But that
figure does not take into account all the marriages that already existed in
a year in which there are 100 marriages and 50 divorces, for example, there
have already been 1,000 marriages-other marriages-that already existed.
That's an entirely different picture and means that only 5% of the marriages
ended in divorce, not 50%, using those figures. Of course, if that continues
to happen year after year, the overall numbers and the impact of divorces
will begin to number the same as marriages. 

Veteran pollster Louis Harris says that "only"-listen to this-"11-12% of
people who have ever been married have ever been divorced. That's a big
difference from 50% which we hear all the time. George Barna who is a
professional surveyor, Christian in emphasis, did a survey. He found that
34% of adults who had ever been married had experienced divorce. And then he
realized after he took his survey that 33% of Christians were divorced. Now
I would just suggest we go back and we take a look at those figures once
again to find out where the truth lies in those figures. When he looked at
born again Christians, this is what he said was a born again Christian.
"Born again Christians are just as likely to get divorced as non-born again
adults. Overall, 33% of all born again individuals who have been married
have gone through a divorce, which is statistically identical to the 34%
incidents among non-born again adults. 

However, if you go to his definition of what a born again Christian is-which
I went to that survey and found that out-this is what a born again Christian
is: Born again Christians are not defined on the basis of characterizing
them as born again, but based upon their answer of two questions. These are
the two questions: "Have you ever made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ
that is still important in your life today?" That's the first question. If
the respondents said yes, then they are asked a follow-up question about
life after death. One of the seven perspectives a respondent may choose is:
"When I die I will go to heaven because I have confessed my sins and have
accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior." Individuals who say "yes" to the first
question and select this statement as their belief about their salvation are
then categorized as "born again." In that survey this is what those born
again Christians believe. This is where you find out whether they're truly
born again or not. By the way, Barna Research Group says that 41% of
Americans are born again. Forty-one percent of Americans are born again. I
wonder if 40% of the people who attend church are born again. Eighty-five
percent believe-this is the same survey-believe the Bible is totally
accurate in all of its teachings. Seventy-six percent believe they
personally have a responsibility to tell others about their religious
beliefs. Forty-five percent agree that Satan is not a living being, but is a
symbol of evil. So 55% believe that he's real. Thirty-four percent believe
that if a person is good enough they can earn a place in heaven. So, you can
earn your way to heaven if you are good enough. And it goes on and on and on
to define what born again means. For me, anyway, that I can understand that,
that it's not just "you think you're going to heaven, but whether you really
are or not." 

I have a short article here just to sort of warm you up to the whole issue
of being divorced. This is a Christian music person. I'm going to use her
name as "Mary." I'm not going to give who it is. Mary and another Christian
music person-let's call him "Bob"-both had to dispose of existing marriages
before their nuptials, their latest nuptials, could take place. The couple
was married earlier this year in an outdoor service with an intimate
gathering of friends and family. The cake was perfect. Mary's theology of
marriage was not. Mary said she recognized that God hates divorce but she
also realized a more personal and freeing truth. In August 1998, after going
to what she calls tons of marital counseling, she went to the pastor with
whom she had sought guidance and to her then-husband-let's call his name
"George"-and told them, "I believe and trust that I've been released from
this marriage. And I say that knowing that even the Bible says the heart is
deceitful." She further explained how she knew that it was God's will and
"to the very best of my level of peace, I had a very settled unshakable
feeling about the path that I was going to follow." Some advice from another
counselor added to her blessed assurance. Mary recalled her counselor's
words. He said this: "Mary, God made marriage for people. He didn't make
people for marriage. He provided this so that people could enjoy each other
to the fullest. I say that if you have two people that are not thriving
healthfully in a situation, I say remove the marriage." A fine counselor,
don't you think? One who views marriage as a life-enhancement or mere
adornment or utility rather than a sacred institution to be honored and
worked at. And that happens in the church today. 

What is divorce? 

(I will be giving out the notes. We'll have them up here for you when we're
finished. You can have all of my notes. They've been revised in the last
four weeks but I wanted you to be able to follow this.) 

God said in Genesis 2:24, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and
his mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh."
God instituted marriage. God puts a man and a woman together in marriage.
And what God has joined together-and in every marriage that I've ever
performed-no man should put asunder. I say that every single marriage that I
perform. 

Marriage is a covenant of companionship. Marriage was provided by God to
provide companionship. Genesis 2:18, God saw that man was alone and he
needed a companion. And so Eve was created out of the rib of Adam. The man
was alone and it was not good. God didn't pronounce creation good until
after. 

The divorce, then, is the repudiation-it is the breaking-of that covenant
agreement in which both parties promised to provide for companionship, in
all its ramifications for one another. The word for divorce in the Old
Testament that occurs in the phrase "bill of divorce"-it's found in
Deuteronomy 24, Isaiah 50:1, and Jeremiah 3:8-means to "cut off". The most
prominent New Testament word apoluo means to "loose from, to put from, to
put away, to send, to release or to dismiss." Now there is a controversy
with Old Testament and New Testament interpreters as to what some of those
Hebrew and those Greek words individually actually mean in the context in
which they're found. Jay Adams said this: "What we must keep in mind,
though, that the context of a passage is always the key to the meaning of a
word." And he used that particular phrase or that sentence that I just said
in his book Marriage,
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0310511119/biblebulletinboa>
Divorce, and Remarriage in the Bible. For those of you who are looking for a
more thorough study on this issue-Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage in the
Bible, by Jay Adams is a very good source. 

There's another one-Divorce
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0830812830/biblebulletinboa>  and
Remarriage: Four Christian Views. Somebody once said to me, "How could they
be Christian if they have four views?" But that's another place that you can
look at. Another thing to remember is that when God instituted marriage,
divorce was not provided as an option. I'll make this statement, out of
Malachi 2:16, "God hates divorce." And we'll look at Malachi 2:16 later. He
hates it because it always involves unfaithfulness to the solemn covenant of
marriage that two partners have entered into before Him. 

Gentlemen, this is a challenge. And I don't see the men of the Soviet Union
here or maybe they could verify this for me, but in the former Soviet Union
it was reported that divorce rate among non-believers was very, very high;
yet in the evangelical church it is very, very low. Why? When a Russian
pastor finds out that a family-a marriage-is having problems, they go over
to the home and they do not leave until the problem is settled. You men
would be really busy. I know I would be very busy; my wife would never see
me. But that's the kind of commitment those men had to solving the kind of
problems that are in the church. And there are many. That's what divorce is.


B. The Perspectives of Various Interpreters. 

By the way, you get this from that book Divorce
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0830812830/biblebulletinboa>  and
Remarriage: Four Christian Views. It was edited by Wayne House. 

1. There's the one view: No divorce, no remarriage. 

That's held by Charles Ryrie, Bill Gothard, and Carl Laney. They believe
that it is not possible to have a divorce and a remarriage. "Marriage is
indissoluble" is their take on that. It's a covenant relationship forever,
or until one partner dies. 

2. The second view is divorce in some cases but no remarriage. 

This is held by John Stott, William Heth, and also by John Piper. They
believe in "bone of my bones," "flesh of my flesh." It's a kinship view
there-one flesh. As a matter of fact, John Piper wrote a paperback in 1986
about his view, gave 11 reasons why he believes in his view. But at the same
time, when he issued that, said, that the leadership of Bethlehem Baptist
Church did not agree with him in this particular view. 

3. This is really the least popular of the views-there's a third view:
Divorce and remarriage in wide variety of circumstances. 

This is held mainly by liberals. Larry Richards wrote something about this
in that book and that God always forgives sins, so you can go and get
divorce, you're to be happy, and so it's an option. James Dobson would also
say this and he'd say in specific cases of abuse such as emotional, physical
and verbal abuse that it would be okay to get a divorce in those situations.
Pragmatic churches-they don't want to tell someone something that they
wouldn't want to hear. 

I can remember a few years ago, a gentleman who had been in our church went
to another church. And he and his wife were there for a little while, and it
was more of a pragmatic kind of church. And his wife instituted a divorce
against him, or beginning a divorce against him. The church there wouldn't
help him. He wanted to keep his marriage together. He desired to keep his
marriage together. And so he went to the leadership there, and the
leadership there said, "No, no, we don't do anything like that." He came
back here and asked us if we would get involved. And we called up the
pastors there. And we went over there to try to work with them and they
said, "Sorry but this is not an area of where we want to get involved in a
person's life." That's a pragmatic church. Jay Adams in his book calls that
an "un-church." They're really not a church. 

4. Fourth: Divorce and remarriage in very limited circumstances. 

This would be the view of the elders of Grace Community Church. As a matter
of fact, since I was teaching this, I thought I'd throw it out there to the
elders at the last elders' meeting and said, "Does everybody believe in the
Elders' Perspective that we hold on marriage and divorce?" And the reason I
said that is because somebody once came back to me and said, "All the elders
don't agree with you, Bill." And so I wanted to make sure they all agreed
with me and so they did all agree. By the way, for something to become an
Elders' Perspective, all of the elders must agree. It's unanimous. It has to
be unanimous. 

John MacArthur believes this view, Jay Adams, John Murray, William Luck, Guy
Duty, Lorraine Boettner, Thomas Edgar, the Westminster Confession, and most
Reformed theologians. This is a divorce because of unrepentant sexual
sins-Matthew 19:9. And when the unbeliever leaves, let him leave-1
Corinthians 7:15. One party within the covenant forsakes their covenant
obligations, and the other is unable to keep them because they've broken
those covenant obligations. In those cases-divorce and remarriage would be
permitted. This is from the Elders' Perspective as it was written by the
elders a few years ago: "Divorce in the scripture is permitted as an
accommodation to man's sin for the protection of the faithful partner by
releasing him or her from the oppressive bondage of covenant duties that he
or she cannot fulfill." 

Now I say this and I want to give you an example. There's a lady in our
church who came into counseling with me-I don't know-four or five years ago.
And she said to me, "Pastor, my husband hasn't lived with me for seven
years. He's been living with another woman. What can I do?" When I took her
to the scriptures, pointed out what the scriptures have to say, she said,
"But I do not want to divorce my husband." I said, "Fine, that's a choice
that you can make. And that's your desire." She waited, seven years she
waited. Her husband came back to her. Her husband left the other woman. They
are now in the church. As a matter of fact, just recently I did a funeral
for one of their relatives. And he is a functioning member of our church.
He's repented of his sin. He had never been a Christian prior to that but he
has repented of his sin and he's come to know Jesus Christ. 

Divorce in the scriptures is permitted only because of man's sin. Divorce is
only a concession to man's sin and is not-is not part of God's original plan
for marriage. 



C.   Passages Specifically Addressing Divorce and Remarriage


Why don't you take out your Bibles? Let's look at what the Word of God has
to say. We're going start in the Old Testament. And we're going to start in
Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy 24:1-4,  "1When a man takes a wife and marries her,
and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some
indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in
her hand and sends her out from his house, 2and she leaves his house and
goes and becomes another man's wife, 3and if the latter husband turns
against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand
and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her
to be his wife, 4 then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed
to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an
abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which
the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance." 

Divorce itself is not condemned here. It could easily have been condemned
but it was not condemned; it was regulated. It was regulated. In this
passage it is viewed as a fait accompli. It's being done. It's happening, so
there's a regulation rather than a forbidding of divorce here. At the same
time this does not imply that God blinks at divorce. We're not saying that.
God does not blink at divorce. There is no command to divorce here. Moses
just mentions the process one is to take. He writes her a bill of divorce
and he hands it to her. Marriage is not indissoluble. That view doesn't
work. There's a former husband that doesn't equal her husband now and so
marriage is able to happen, and it even says it right here. "Indecency in
her"-what is that? The Hebrew word erwath dabar, it means "a nakedness of a
thing." It's two Hebrew words, which literally mean "a matter of nakedness."
It has to be short of adultery, though, doesn't it? Because if it was
adultery, in the Old Testament, what would happen? She would be stoned, or
he would be stoned if it was a "he." There's something indecent; there's
something shameful. There's some kind of an indecency here. It seems to mean
something indecent, disgusting, or repulsive. It's habitual indulgent of
some kind of a sexual sin just short of adultery. We know it wasn't internet
pornography but we don't know exactly what it was. John Murray says-this is
what he says-"There is no evidence to show that erwath dabar refers to
adultery or an act of sexual uncleanness. We may conclude that if erwath
dabar means some indecency or impropriety." 

If you turn back one page or, for me it's one page, Deuteronomy 23:14, that
same word-that same Hebrew-that same two Hebrew words are used there, "Since
the LORD your God walks in the midst of your camp to deliver you and to
defeat your enemies before you, before your camp, therefore your camp must
be holy, and He must not see anything indecent-same word-among you or He
will turn away from you. It's something that's repulsive. It's some kind of
repugnancy there-don't know exactly what it is. So rather than divorce being
condemned there, divorce is regulated. 

Now you could go to Ezra chapters 9 and 10. As a matter of fact, if you want
to go to Ezra chapter 10, here we find the Israelites returning from their
first deportation to the land of Israel. Ezra reads the law, and it says
that they cannot marry foreign wives. Remember, he opened up the law and
this is the first time that they're seeing the law in years. And they see
that they're not to marry foreign wives. What had they done? They had
married foreign wives. There's a need here for wholesale national
repentance. And what God tells them to do is to divorce their foreign wives.
God tells them to divorce their foreign wives. To divorce because they had
intermarriage with other religions, not other ethnic groups, but they were
other religions. This is a unique, and it's a special moment in history.
This will not be repeated. In other words, somebody at your church couldn't
come to you and say, "Look I married an unbeliever and now I need to get rid
of them because God says it's an unclean thing." Some people may try to do
that, but they can't use that. This is unique. And in Ezra 10:2-3, God
sanctions the divorce and says to divorce them in order to have the nation
of Israel purified. This is a legal divorce then. They weren't marrying
Jewish women; they were marrying illegal women. 

So there're two possibilities here, or two alternatives: Allow the nation to
remain defiled through mixed marriages. And this would have been according
to what God is saying here-a greater evil, since the intermarriages would
have polluted the chosen people. And He didn't want the chosen people
polluted. And so, the other alternative is to purify the nation by
commanding divorce to dissolve this forbidden union and to preserve the
generation from idolatry. This would display a renewed heart of the people
to follow God's law and to obey and to seek the mercy of their sovereign
God. That's number two. I should've put that up there but, well, turn to
Jeremiah 3. 

Jeremiah 3, where we would see divorce once again in the Old Testament. This
time it's a different kind of divorce but basically the same in scope. "Then
the Lord," starting in verse 6: "Then the LORD said to me in the days of
Josiah the king, 'Have you seen what unfaithfulness Israel did? She went up
on the high hill and under every green tree, and she was a harlot there.'" A
harlot being somebody of adulterous nature. "I thought, 'After she has done
all these things she will return to Me'"-this is God speaking-"but she did
not return, and her treacherous sister Judah saw it. And I saw that for all
the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ
of divorce"-God handed a writ of divorce. "Yet her treacherous sister Judah
did not fear; but she went and was a harlot." "Because of the lightness of
her harlotry, she polluted the land and committed adultery with stones and
trees." 

The divorce here-by God-against the Hebrew people was for sexual sin. A
faithless nation was divorced by God. This is sort of the context from
Matthew 5 and 19, which we'll get to in a minute. It's not always of sin to
be involved in a divorce. You can sometimes be the innocent party of a
divorce. There is and this is where the idea of the innocent comes from: God
was involved in the divorce. So if it was sin to get a divorce, then God
sinned. Don't think so. Involvement in and initiating a divorce is sometimes
encouraged with unrepentant sexual sin. When there is an unrepentant sexual
sin, that [divorce] sometimes can be encouraged. God was unable to keep His
side of the covenant because Israel forsook her side. The implication here
is that God didn't want this divorce but because the other party didn't keep
their vow, God divorced them. 

Turn with me to the last Old Testament scripture, Malachi, chapter 2.
Malachi 2:13-16, "13This is another thing you do: You cover the altar of the
LORD with tears, with weeping and with groaning, because He no longer
regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand. 14"Yet you
say, 'For what reason?' Because the LORD has been a witness between you and
the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously." By the
way, the context of this is the older men-older Hebrew men-were divorcing
their older Hebrew wives to marry younger Hebrew wives. They wanted younger
women, it's much like what's happening today. "Though she is your companion
and your wife by covenant. 15But not one has done so who has a remnant of
the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring?
Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the
wife of your youth." Verse 16, which we'll talk about in a little more
detail, "For I hate divorce," says the LORD, the God of Israel, "and him who
covers his garment with wrong," says the LORD of hosts. 

The covenant-breaking is condemned. The context of Malachi, as I mentioned,
is the older men wanting to divorce their younger wives. God hates divorce.
Does He really? Is that what the scripture is really saying? Some have said
that because of the Hebrew pointing, that's the way some people have
translated it, obviously, in the New American Standard. Anybody here have
the English Standard Version? The new Bible by Crossway. One. One out of all
of you. Okay, before they translated that particular verse-and he's smiling
because he knows where I'm going with this-in 1939 there was a translation
of the Bible that translated that verse this way. What happened is instead
of it being the third person, it's a first person. So listen to this: "'For
the one who hates in divorces,' says the LORD, God of Israel, 'covers his
clothing with violence,' says the LORD of hosts.'" It's a different way.
This is a complete Bible. It's an American translation from 1939. The
Crossway translation, the English Standard Version, which is an excellent
translation and is used, beginning to be used, more and more. It says this:
"For the man who hates in divorces, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers
his garments with violence, says the LORD of hosts." So doesn't say that God
hates divorce there. But we know God hates sin. So it doesn't say, "Well,
now everybody can get divorce." That's not what we're saying. But that verse
doesn't say that. God still hates divorce in the sense that it's sin as He
hates all sin. So I just want to make sure you heard that. 

New Testament, Matthew chapter 5. Matthew chapter 5. This is verses 31 and
32: "31It was said, 'Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a
certificate of divorce'; 32but I say to you that everyone who divorces his
wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and
whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery." 

What's Jesus' point here? The law of God was much more demanding than the
Jewish tradition had made it out to be. In the Jewish tradition they were
supposed to go through all of that, but at this time in Israel men were
divorcing their wives for things like burning the toast, or for not being
well-kept, or for putting on too much weight. They would divorce them for
anything. And the Lord here is saying there is only one reason. The
exception clause applies to both a divorce and the remarriage here. If
they're divorced for unchastity, then remarriage is not adultery. That's
what this is saying. Everyone agrees Jesus was saying that, except that in
one type of situation, where divorce and remarriage are sinful. When you are
divorced for unchastity or if you have a divorce because of someone
committing adultery, then you can be remarried. But if it's not for
unchastity, you cannot be-or for any other reason-you cannot be remarried. 

Unchastity is unrepentant sexual sin, as understood by the Jews. Some folks
have said this refers to the betrothal period. Cannot refer to betrothal
period or the betrothal context; adultery is a term and a reference only to
those who are married. Some say the word adultery is used by Jesus for those
who are not married anymore so it does mean marriage is indissoluble; that
is not what it's saying here. 

Sexual sin does not break the marriage bond. I have had situations where I
have counseled with folks where sexual sin was involved in their
relationship. A woman once left her husband, and the husband came to my
office, and he said, "Pastor, I want my wife back. She left me. She's living
with another man. But I want her back." He was at my door for about three
weeks almost every day. "Pastor, I want my wife back." And eventually we
found out a phone number and we started calling her. Eventually she repented
of her sin. And "Hosea," that's what we'll use as his name, took her back.
Even though she had been involved, the sexual sin did not-does not-make a
divorce. What makes a divorce is divorce. He took her back. Four weeks later
we found out she's pregnant with the other man's child. "Pastor, I still
want my wife." And he stayed married to her and about five weeks ago I was
teaching and their son was sitting there with them. That happens. Those are
good things that happen, that you can see God's working in a man's heart
even though there was sin there. Sexual sin is the thing that occasions the
divorce, but they are not synonymous. The divorce breaks the marriage bond.
That's what breaks the marriage bond. 

Let's look at Matthew chapter 19. And I know that you have tons of
questions. I was already handed a question before I even got started. And I
was asked four questions before I even got started. So I'll take as many as
we can and try to work through them with you. Matthew chapter 19, verses 3
through 10. We're not going all the way through 12. We're just going to go
three through ten: "Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking,
'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?' "Make
sure you keep that question in mind, because that's the question that Jesus
is going to answer. He's not going to answer some other questions. He's
going to answer that question. 

And He said to them, "Have you not read that He who created them from the
beginning made them male and female, 5and said, 'For this reason a man shall
leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall
become one flesh'? 6So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore
God has joined together, let no man separate." 7They said to Him, "Why then
did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?"
Remember His answer to that question: "and He said to them: 'Because of your
hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the
beginning it was not that way'"-or it has not been that way. "And I say to
you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another
woman commits adultery." The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of
the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." 

And it could be that that's why a lot of singles are around today. Do you
have a lot of singles in your ministry? It seems like there's a lot of
singles around. They probably have read that: "It is better not to
marry"-Just that portion of the scripture. 

Is it lawful to divorce for any cause at all? No. Absolutely not. Absolutely
not. This is a twisted version of what Moses said in Deuteronomy 24. Moses
never commanded divorce. Jesus' response to the questions: Is it lawful for
a man to divorce for any reason at all? Can you divorce because of abuse?
Can you divorce because they don't love you anymore? Can you divorce because
you're no longer compatible? No. This is not a command, but it's a
regulation. Clearly divorce is an accommodation to man's sin that violates
God's original purpose for the intimate unity and the permanence of the
marriage bond. Legal divorce was a concession for the faithful partner due
to the sexual sin of the sinning partner so that the faithful partner was no
longer bound to the marriage. Although Jesus did say that divorce is
permitted in some situations, we must remember that His primary point in
this discourse is to correct the Jews' idea that they could divorce one
another for any cause at all--that's what they thought, that's what they
practiced, that's what they did-and to show them the gravity of pursuing a
sinful divorce because of sexual sin, porneia is a word that's used there. 

The New Testament allows for divorce. Porneia is a general term that
encompasses sexual sins such as adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, and
incest. Some folks want it to be extended to other things within that range.
And I think that can only come with wisdom as you think through that. With a
high instance of pornography in men's lives, how far do we go? But the word
pornography or porneia means adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, and
incest. When one partner violates the unity and the intimacy of a marriage
by sexual sins and forsakes his or her covenant obligation, the faithful
partner is placed in an extremely difficult situation. [It] could be like
that lady who for seven years knew that her husband was living with another
woman and she continued to be faithful to her husband; that she desired to
do that. You can do that. But at same time, that same woman could have, if
she wanted to, according to the words of Jesus Christ, divorced her husband
and remarried. After all means are exhausted to bring the sinning partner to
repentance, the Bible permits release for the faithful partner through
divorce. And I've got to tell you all means need to be taken. When we've had
these kinds of situations here, it's taken months and months and months of
calling a person to repentance, of church discipline if that's involved in
it, and all kinds of things to try to bring that person back. 

In answer to the disciples' question, Jesus explained that God allowed Moses
to "permit" divorce only because of His people's hardness of heart, and that
it was permissible only in the case of adultery. Verse 9 says this: "And I
say to you whoever divorces his wife except for immorality and marries
another woman commits adultery." Jesus states that the one who divorces his
wife, divorces for some other reason than immorality-that is, porneia-then
he is in sin. He is committing adultery if he gets married again. The verse
then says that the one who remarries for other than immoral reasons commits
adultery. This is the real exception that allows for genuine divorce so that
the person may marry another. Thomas Edgar, in that book that I mentioned
before Divorce and Remarriage: Four Christian Views, said this: "The
exception clause stating that divorce for adultery and subsequent remarriage
are proper is Jesus' definitive statement on this issue, showing a desired
spiritual attitude toward divorce and remarriage. Although Jesus does not
require divorce in such a case, He indicates that it is perfectly proper and
without stigma on the part of the innocent party." That has implications for
future leadership, deacons, deaconess, elders, pastors, all of those kinds
of things. 

Mark 10 and Luke 16:18. Before you ask the question, I thought I'd answer
it. The question would be: Why do they not mention the exception clause? You
have two other gospel accounts; why don't they mention the exception clause?
Neither passage contains the question that was discussed in Matthew 19:3.
Christ's purpose was the same as above to make a polemic point that you
should not divorce, contrary to what you are thinking. Since the question
wasn't asked, there is no qualifier necessary to say what the one exception
is. And some people may want to say, "Well, why don't those scriptures have
it?" Because the question was never asked. The exception clause is only in
Matthew, in Matthew 5. 

This is from John MacArthur; this is a quote from him: "In Matthew 5 and 19
it was necessary to include the clause, not as an addition to God's law, but
to reaffirm the original and correct the Pharisees' misrepresentation of
God's law regarding adultery. Frequently in the New Testament general
statements are made that could in their immediate context be taken as
absolute. But when seen in the broader context of full revelation, they are
recognized as an element within a larger sphere of truth. The exception
clause, providing divorce on the ground of adultery fits into this body of
truth." And that was from John MacArthur's book called The
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802425240/biblebulletinboa>
Family. 

Now there is one other reason, one other way, or one other possibility of a
divorce and that's found in 1 Corinthians, chapter 7. Why don't you turn
there? 1 Corinthians, chapter 7. This is the most extensive passage in all
of scripture on divorce and remarriage. I would believe that Paul could have
within this text here said, "No divorce, no remarriage." He could have, but
he did not. At this time in Paul's day, there was an average of six
marriages for each male. They would get married six times. By the way, this
is the second reason permitting a divorce, where an unbelieving mate does
not desire to live with his or her spouse and they leave. Let's just read
verses 12 through 15, and then we'll go back into the whole context. "12But
to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an
unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her."
Underline that-"not divorce her." "13And a woman who has an unbelieving
husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband
away. 14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the
unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise
your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15Yet if the unbelieving
one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in
such cases, but God has called us to peace." 

Now the context of this starts in verse 1. And the context there is about
the marriage bed. It's telling the man that his body isn't his-it's his
wife's. And the wife, your body isn't yours-it's your husband. You should
not deprive one another but you should come together to fulfill that sexual
satisfaction. You should not be depriving one another, because if you do
deprive one another, it could lead to temptation and to sexual sin. Verse 8,
it says to the unmarried, "I say to the unmarried," and there it's
impossible, impossible not to include divorced people. The word that's used
there is for virgins, for widows and for those who are divorced. Agamos is
the word, and so it includes them also. 

In verses 10 and 11 both partners of the marriage in view here are
Christians. Let's read that verse because it does tell us these are
Christians. "And to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord,
that the wife should not leave her husband (but if she does leave, she must
remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the
husband should not divorce his wife." And then, of course, in verses 12
through 15 it changes-that if they leave, let them leave. 

Verse 11 in the case of believers seeking or having already received an
unbiblical divorce, they are instructed to remain unmarried, or else be
reconciled to their husband. If a Christian does divorce another Christian
except for adultery, neither partner is free to marry another. That's very
important. If a Christian does divorce another Christian, except for
adultery, neither partner is free to marry another. They must stay single.
Or they must rejoin their former mate. That is from First
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802407544/biblebulletinboa>
Corinthians Commentary by John MacArthur. 

But verses 12 through 15 is talking about mixed marriages-a believer and
unbeliever. Verse 14 gives the reason to stay in the marriage: it fulfills
covenant obligations, possibility of even seeing your spouse get saved or
your children get saved. Verse 15, in God's sight the covenant between a man
and a woman is disbanded by adultery, by death, or by an unbeliever leaving.
These are the only cases in which a Christian can legitimately be remarried.
Verse 15, they are not bound to marital obligations, because God has called
us to peace. Divorce is allowed, and may be preferable in such situations.
When an unbeliever desires to leave, trying to keep him or her in the
marriage might only create greater tension, conflict, and such. 

Sometimes one partner cannot keep his side of the covenant because the other
partner has forsaken it through unrepentant sexual sin or desertion. Divorce
was a concession for the faithful partner due to abandonment by the sinning
partner so that the faithful partner was no longer bound to the marriage-1
Corinthians 7. 

Now some may say, "Why haven't you used Romans chapter 7:1-7?" Well, why
don't we look there? We don't consider that and you can read through it. We
don't consider that since it uses marriage as an illustration of how
Christ's death releases the believer from the justification of the Mosaic
Law. It does not mention, or there is no mention there of divorce. 

Now in the papers that I have, and we can hand these out in the end, I make
eight proposals. And I'm just going to let you read through those eight
proposals and you can have that paper obviously. It's also on the disk that
you were handed. But these are the eight proposals about sexual immorality,
and about if one partner leaves, and about trying to achieve reconciliation
in the marriage, and those kinds of things. 

Now I'd like to get to some of the questions. One of the questions that was
asked of me: 

"Do you feel a man should be a pastor if his wife had a biblical divorce in
her past?" Probably the one huge, the one critical question that's always
asked of any man that goes out to find a pastorate: "Have you or your wife
been divorced?" I have had some friends who have had divorces in their
background before they came to know Christ. And they're asked that question
and it's very difficult for them to get placed because most churches don't
want to do that, but there is not a biblical reason not to allow them to be
in leadership. There's no biblical reason to not allow that person to be in
leadership. Is it difficult for that person to get a position? Yes, but it's
not an impossibility. So I believe that a pastor who is married, and his
wife had a biblical divorce in the past, he could be pastor. He could be a
church leader; he could be an elder; he could be the chairman of the deacon
board, whatever it may be. But I've got to tell you, there're very few
churches that will see that happen. Now some people will go to 1 Timothy 3
and say, "But you're supposed to be the husband of one wife." Well, single
people could be in leadership. Can't they be elders? And so if single people
could, so if you have married, so it doesn't mean that you have to have a
marriage and it can only be once. That's not what that means. 

So those are just some of the questions. Are there any other questions [that
you] would like to ask? Yes, stand up, and I will try to repeat it if I can
hear it. 

Question: Suppose you have a married couple in your church and one had a
divorce that was not for adulterous reasons.  Is it still considered
adultery now, that they have been married for a while?

Answer: There are some questions to ask here: When she got divorced the
first time, was she a believer? Okay, well, you see that's why you have to
have those specifics. If it was a believer and they divorced, it was an
unbiblical divorce; hopefully the church did something about it. If she
stayed in the same church and then they let her go get remarried, there's a
whole lot of implications here that the church is not a church. It's not
shepherding its flock. But they would want to get involved with this gal.
Let's say a gal came into our congregation and she wanted to marry somebody.
We have that all the time. And they've been previously divorced. They sit
down with a pastor. We try to understand from what they're saying whether it
was a biblical divorce or not, was it pre-Christ or not. All of those kinds
of things have to be asked. Was that person a believer? Were they not a
believer? All of those things need to be known before we can really give an
answer. 

Q: They were believers when they got a divorce, but now they have been
married for a long time and have repented of that divorce.  Would you seek
to absolve that marriage because of the adultery? 

A: Once they're married, now they've divorced, now they're remarried. They
married a believer. They're in your church. The scripture says that they're
committing adultery. Obviously you're not going to tell them, "Oh, go get
divorced again to make this right." Right? That would be the alternative,
right? So you're not going to tell them that. You're going to tell them,
"Repent of what you've done and then go live your life." 

Q: So if they decided to divorce and the one goes back to their former
spouse-would that be forbidden in the sight of God?

A: That is forbidden in the sight of God, in this sense, all sin is
forbidden in the sight of God. We shouldn't be sinning any sin, right? "The
wages of sin is death." And that's the pronouncement we should have each
time we sin, and the same thing with this. But once they've done it, you
can't undo it. You can't say, "Well, why don't you get divorced, and you go
over here then you go over there, and we'll try to get you back to the other
partner because then even Deuteronomy would say, "Don't do that." 

Q: I can see it both ways. I see some people are saying 2 Corinthians 5:17
that they're a new creation in Christ, but I also see Deuteronomy 30 that
basically says a marriage vow is a marriage vow, whether you're a believer
or not. The Bible does not differentiate that (if you're an unbeliever and
you make a vow then that doesn't count, but if you're a believer then it
does count). A vow is a vow. And it's the holiness of a vow. That's what the
Bible teaches. So you kind of have those two things going against each
other, you have a new creation in Christ that might be used as a proof text
to say that you can get remarried if the divorce occurred before your
conversion.  Then you have all the biblical teaching on the permanency of
the vows. 

A: And I say that with a caveat that they can't get remarried to their
former partner if they're an unbeliever. The question is, and I can't repeat
all of it, but he's saying that there's sort of an incongruity here. The
caveat in that is that you cannot marry an unbeliever, would everybody agree
with that? You shouldn't marry an unbeliever. So the situation he was giving
me here was two believers and it wasn't an unbeliever. You cannot go back to
an unbeliever and remarry them. If they get saved, you could marry them. So
I think that solves [it]. 

Q: No, not really. That's an unbiblical divorce. You have a "burnt toast"
divorce in Ohio and the person's not a Christian. They come to Grace
Community and they say, "I want to marry my secretary." And you say, "What
was the cause of your divorce?" And they say, "Well, I just didn't like my
wife. So there's no biblical divorce. 

A: Well, what we would do is say, "Is that former person a believer now? 

Q: No. 

A: Okay, they're not. Well, you can't marry an unbeliever. 

Q: Well, what if that former person got married to someone else and is a
believer. 

A: You're free to get married. 

Q: Really? 

A: Yes, it's-you just can't go marry an unbeliever. That's the first thing
that you can't do. 

Q: What if you remain unmarried? 

A: You could. I mean that could be a choice-to remain unmarried. 

Q: Well, I'm saying should the church impose that choice? 

A: No, I don't think so. I don't think that's the church's choice to impose
that upon them. If they're now a believer, a new creature in Christ, then if
they want to get married, they can get married at that point. 

Q: What do you do in the case of abuse?  Let's say that we got either a wife
being abused by her husband and now looking at a divorce, or you got a wife
who already divorced her husband because of abuse and now wants to get
remarried?

A: Okay, we have two situations there. What about the question of abuse?
What do you do for that? What we do is we get involved in the situation.
Let's say it's two believers, okay, and you get involved in confronting the
man-number one. Number two is you invoked Romans 13 and you get the law
involved in it. Because a man shouldn't be touching his wife in that way. He
shouldn't be beating her and so you have her report him to the police. And
then the police begin to deal with it. And while he's incarcerated you begin
to present the gospel to him if he needs to get saved. And if he is saved,
then you present to him how he needs to change and to become more like
Christ, and to give up that beating, and stuff. But it's not a reason to get
divorced. It's not okay to get divorced because of being abused in any way. 

Q: So I am assuming if she already divorced him that she couldn't get
remarried? 

A: We would not say, if they did get a divorce-if she did divorce him-and
they were believers, okay, she can't go and marry another. 

Q: You got a man who's an unbeliever, married a woman who professed to be a
believer. She deserted him, to the point of desertion on the very day he
submitted his life to Christ. They never reconciled the marriage by any
means. She had made up her mind. Deserted him; never looked back. As he had
grown in the Lord, he confesses that in their five years of marriage that
she, despite her confession, outside of the church's attendance has no
evidence of truly being redeemed. She has had no contact for four years.
Now, since then, he's found a young lady who is a believer, but feels bound.
The question for tonight is it tentative to take a step without knowing
definitively whether or not he's free. He believes himself to be free based
on 1 Corinthians 7. However, because of the profession... How do you deal
with that? 

Q: What I would do, if I was involved with him, is I would call the "ex."
And I can't repeat all of that for the tape so, sorry. But there's an "ex"
somewhere who professed faith at one point, they're no longer walking with
the Lord, some people would say backslidden, there's no signs of any faith.
Then I would have one of the leaders get in touch with that person. Now that
can become very difficult. They may be very bitter. They may be very angry.
And you try to find out whether they are a believer or not. If they are a
believer-they're truly a believer-he cannot remarry. He cannot remarry. If
she's not a believer, then he is free then to marry. Okay? 

Q: Does that have anything to do with discernment? 

A: Discernment on the part of the leadership to find out whether that person
is really a believer. And that, you know, that's going to be difficult. 

Q: Now there was a certain amount of counseling prior to the divorce. Since
then he has contacted who their pastor was. Their pastor felt that it was
based on Scripture. 

A: That [she] was an unbeliever? So at least you got one side, and that's
good. I will still go the next step and call her if they could. Contact her
now and find out what does she think. You know, what has her life been since
she left him. And just try to get some understanding there. 

Q: You had mentioned that there is no biblical reason that a pastor who has
a wife who had a biblical divorce in the past could not been in pastorate? 

A: Right. 

Q: Would you view that differently, for example, if you were in a very small
community and the divorced involved unbelievers. And most of that small town
had not known it was a biblical divorce. How would the qualification "be
blameless" come into play ther? 

A: Question is, that in a small town where you have this divorce happen and
it's known widely. I think the "above reproach" of 1Timothy 3 takes
precedence there. And I think that above reproach sort of shines some light
that maybe this is not a good thing to do in that community. But you could
go to another community and be a leader in a church. But in that one, you
know, then you're bringing a reproach against the name of Christ on that, or
it could be. You know, I mean, we don't even know, I don't even know how
people know, they don't even care, but that's something to keep in mind.
Yes, sir 

Q: In the case of two persons pursuing a non-adulterous cause of divorce in
that community, is it the policy of Grace Community to exercise discipline
against the pursuer of divorce to the extent that they will be declared a
non-believer? 

A: Well, actually, they're never declared a non-believer if you look at 1
Corinthians 5:5. A person who's put out of the church is not really declared
a non-believer. What does it say? 

Q: Matthew 18. 

A: Yes, Matthew 18. But look at 1 Corinthians 5. It says there, "I have
delivered," so this is the man who had incestuous activities with his,
probably stepmother-I'm going to guess. "I have decided to deliver such one
to Satan for the destruction of his flesh so that his spirit may be saved in
the day of the Lord Jesus." So there's an indication that this person was a
Christian, but being put out of the church for their immorality in this
area-their unrepentant immorality. So we would pursue church discipline, if
I go back to that question. Would we pursue church discipline on the person
who is going in the direction of getting a divorce and it not a biblical
divorce? Yes, we would. Would we declare them an unbeliever? No. But what we
say is when they are put out of the church, they need to be evangelized in
the sense that people need to go to them, continue to go to them and try to
win them back to Christ cause they are in disobedience to God at that point.
Whether they are a believer or an unbeliever, you know, who knows? But you
need to go and evangelize them in the sense that you need to give them the
gospel so that they repent of their sin. 

Q: So you would not declare them an unbeliever?

A: We don't declare them an unbeliever. We just say that they're put out of
the church and you need to continue to go to them and give them the gospel
for repentance's sake. 

Q: You would not classify that as in a desertion situation because, based on
Matthew 18 I'm wondering if they're a Gentile or an unbeliever, or are they
a believer who's living in disobedience. 

A: Well, how do you figure it out? I mean it's going then to be dependent
upon their life. What is their life after that? Now there are some
Christians who have divorced and decided never to get married again. And
therefore they've fulfilled 1 Corinthians 7. I'm not going to get married
again, but I'm going to get divorced. 

Q: I was divorced as a non-Christian, then became a Christian.  My question
is, "Could I remarry? 

A: Gentleman said he was divorced as a non-Christian, became a Christian,
could he remarry? First of all, your ex-wife-did she become a Christian? 

Q: She did, and I told her about rekindling the relationship but she chose
not to do that. She is now married. 

A: Okay, you are free to marry. That's the way I see the scriptures, that
you are free to marry, but you have to go and pursue that person that you
did divorce to see if they are a Christian-she's already remarried-you can't
marry her. You could decide to live single, like somebody else said. You
could. But we don't believe that the scriptures impose that upon you: to
remain single.  

Q: Two unbelievers get divorced. She remains an unbeliever. He becomes a
believer. Is he free then to remarry? 

A: Because with the believer-you can go to Deuteronomy 24-it's basically the
same kind of idea that if you remarry after you've been divorced and try to
go back to that same person, you're committing adultery. It's an
uncleanness. So yes, that's the way we would look at that.

Q: It seems that the decision was whether the person was saved or not? 

A: Well, the reason the decision is made whether they're saved or not is
because you can't join yourself to an unbeliever. And so if they're saved,
you can try to rekindle that relationship, as he used it. And if they're an
unbeliever, you can't marry an unbeliever, you can't be joined-2 Corinthians
6. I think it's 2 Corinthians 6, that you can't rejoin yourself to them. 

Q: I have a current situation in my church. Twelve years ago this man's wife
left him and their three children. They were both Christians in the church.
She abandoned the relationship and their three children. He remarried. The
kids are a lot older now. She's back. And He has now left his wife and taken
the first one back. The three children are thrilled-mom's back. 

A: He was a believer at what point? 

Q: He's been believer all along. She's left the marriage. He abandoned the
[second] marriage. 

A: And he remarried his ex-wife? 

Q: He remarried his ex-wife. 

A: Ah, he's in sin-for divorce. Yes. He's in sin for divorce; he's in sin
for remarriage. 

Q: Well, my staff-we've inherited this.  He has been disciplined out of the
church for leaving his current wife for no fault.  His first wife abandoned
him for twelve years and was no where to be found. 

A: He didn't learn the first time. That is nuts. Yes, you did the right
thing doing church discipline on him. 

Q: The fleshly tendency is to say that the kids are so happy that mom's
back. You know? It's complicated. 

A: Mom can be back, but she's back as somebody that visit on the weekend or
during the week, you know, whenever that is. But not in the house, not
having that husband divorce again. 

Q: His argument for the divorce the first time was what could he do--she
left. What could he do? He's a man. 

A: Oh, I can understand. It was an unbeliever leaving. He can get married.
But now he can't go and divorce that second wife to go back to that first
wife. That's ridiculous.  

Q: [not able to hear the question] 

A: The question is: a person's dad was a pastor. The mother left for no
biblical reason whatsoever and dissolved the marriage at that point. And the
pastor, who's the father here, didn't step down. And he should have. Yes, he
should have. And there are some well-known pastors that should step down
because of that, or at least one that I know of, because that is an
abomination. I mean his household is not in order. And he should do that.
Now, having your leadership come alongside you is important. But the
leadership may like that kind of quality so that when they get divorced
they'll have somebody to sort of brush it off, too. So you know, you'd
rather have leadership around you that's going to challenge you in those
areas. 

Added to Bible Bulletin Board's "Shepherds' Conference Collection" by:

Tony Capoccia
Bible Bulletin Board 
Box 119
Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022
Our websites: www.biblebb.com <http://www.biblebb.com/>  and
www.gospelgems.com 
Email: tony at biblebb.com
Online since 1986

 

 

 

Thanks.

 

Charis,

 

Mike Abendroth

 

 <http://www.bbcchurch.org> www.bbcchurch.org

 

2 Tim 1:2b  "Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our
Lord."

 

"After the reading of Scripture, which I strenuously inculcate, and more
than any other ... I recommend that the Commentaries of Calvin be read ...
For I affirm that in the interpretation of the Scriptures Calvin is
incomparable, and that his Commentaries are more to be valued than anything
that is handed down to us in the writings of the Fathers -- so much that I
concede to him a certain spirit of prophecy in which he stands distinguished
above others, above most, indeed, above all."  Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609)

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.bbcchurch.org/pipermail/bbc_list/attachments/20061206/6a91eedf/attachment.htm