95. 離婚Divorce
作者: 史鮑爾 (R.C. Sproul)
譯者: 姚錦榮
摘自《神學入門》《Essential Truths of the
Christian Faith》250頁, 更新傳道會出版
在離婚已成氾濫現象的社會裏，討論離婚這個問題實在是當務之急。由於離婚率激增，而離婚也導致了諸多法律及家庭問題，因此美國的法律上加增了一 種叫 做「無過失離婚」的條文，讓離婚手續得以加速進行，但加速離婚所引致的問題也相對地快速增加了。
聖經對離婚的教導絕非只限於皮毛。耶穌是在第一世紀拉比學校為此事爭論時，說出聖經在這方面的教訓。當時自由和保守兩派對離婚理據的分歧很大， 因此他們來向耶穌挑戰:
有法利賽人來試探耶穌說：「人無論甚麼緣故， 都可以休妻麼？」耶穌回答說： 「那起初造人的，是『造男造女』，並且說：『』因此，人要離 開父母，與妻子連合，二 人成為一 體 。』這經你們沒有念過麼？ 既然如此，夫妻不再是兩個人，乃是一體的了；所以神配合的，人不可分 開。」 （太19 : 3〜6
)
當法利賽人問到耶穌有關對離婚較自由的看法 時 ，耶穌立刻把他 們帶回舊約聖經中論及起初設立婚姻的經文。祂強調婚姻是終生的，夫婦成為一體的關係不能憑人的法令解除，只有神有權決定離婚的根據。
但法利賽人繼續爭論說： 「這樣，摩西為甚麼吩咐給妻子休書，就可以休她呢？」耶穌說：「摩西因為你們的心硬，所以許你們休妻，但起初並不是這樣。我告訴你們，凡休妻另娶的，若不是為淫亂的緣 故，就是犯姦淫了，有人娶那被休的婦人，也是犯姦淫了。」（太 19 ：7 - 9)
若再仔細研究耶穌的回答，我們可以看出，祂所針對要談的，是法利賽人對舊約聖經的誤解。摩西並沒有「命令」人離婚，不過是在特別的理由下「容許 」人離昏 （摩西只是神的代言人，其實是神因為人的罪破
壞了婚姻制度，所以才容許人偏離祂原初的旨意。) 穌提醒他們 ，只是因為人的罪 （心硬）才容許人離婚，但這並非設立婚姻的原意。 接著耶穌道出祂自己對婚姻的標準-----禁止離婚，除非有不道德的性關係。而祂對再婚與姦淫的解釋，則必須從無效與非法離婚的角度去理解。如果人所批准的離婚不是神所容許的，這對夫婦在神眼中仍是結婚的，因此非法離婚者的再婚便算為姦淫。
另外，我們在前一章中也提到，保羅曾容許被被非信徒配偶離棄的信徒離婚（ 林前 7 : 10-1 5 ) 。 《 西敏斯特信仰告白》如此總結對此事的論點，說 ：
「人在婚後犯姦淫，一旦被發覺，無辜的一方要求解除婚约，乃是正當的。離婚後再另外嫁娶，把犯罪者看為如同死了一般，乃是合法的 。雖然人的敗壞導使他老是尋找理由 , 無理地將神所配合的夫妻分開 ，但是只有當人犯姦 淫 、或是居心離棄 ，而教會或政府又無法挽救時，夫妻才有充分理由解除婚約。離婚應當遵照公開與合法的手續 辦 理 ，而不可任憑當事人自斷自行。」（註1.）
總結
1. 聖經並不接受「無過失離婚」。
2 .耶穌反對法利賽人的自由離婚觀。
3 . 摩西容許離婚，但並沒有命令人離婚。
4 .耶穌容許人在有不道德性關係的情況下離婚。
5 . 耶穌教導說，非法離婚者再婚便構成姦淫罪。
6 .保羅認為被未信的配偶離棄是可以離婚的。
思考經文：
太5: 31- 32 ；太 19：3- 91 ；罗7：1-3 林前7: 10- 16
註
l.Westminster Confession o fFaith (C om m ittee fo r C hris¬ tia n
Education & P ublication, Presbyterian C hurch in A m e ¬ rica, 1990) ， art. 2 4 :5 ， 6.
96.
DIVORCE
The question of divorce has become urgent in a
society where the incidence of divorce has reached epidemic proportions.
Because of the radical proliferation of divorce and the legal and family
problems it provokes, the law has moved to facilitate the process by providing
for nofault divorce. As divorce becomes easier and easier to obtain, the
problem of its acceleration is exacerbated.
The
Bible is not so superficial about divorce. Jesus’ teaching on the subject is
delivered in the context of a first-century debate between rabbinic schools.
There was an ongoing disagreement between liberals and conservatives about the
legitimate grounds of divorce. Jesus was confronted by the issue:
The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him,
and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any
reason?” And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made
them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and 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’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh.
Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” (Matthew 19:3-6)
We notice that when the Pharisees asked Jesus
about a liberal divorce law, He immediately took them back to Scripture and
God’s original institution of marriage. He stressed that marriage is intended
to be for life. He underscored the union of husband and wife into one flesh
that cannot be dissolved by human decrees. Only God is authorized to determine
the grounds of dissolving marriage.
The debate continued:
They
said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and
to put her away?” He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your
hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not
so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife except for sexual immorality,
and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced
commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:79)
If we
look closely at Jesus’ answer we see that He disputed the Pharisees’
understanding of Old Testament law. Moses did not “command” but allowed divorce
on specified grounds. (Moses, of course, was God’s spokesman. It was God who
permitted this deviation from His original intent because of the presence of
sin that violates marriage.) Jesus reminded them that even this permission was
given only because of sin (hardness of heart) and did not as such nullify the
original intent of marriage.
Jesus then gave His own pronouncement on the
matter—forbidding divorce except on the grounds of sexual immorality. His
enigmatic words about remarriage and adultery must be understood in relation to
invalid and illegitimate divorces. If people grant divorces where God does not,
then the couple is still married in the sight of God. Therefore, remarriage of
illegitimately divorced people constitutes entering into an adulterous
relationship.
Later,
as we said in the previous chapter, Paul extended permission to divorce in the
case of the believer being abandoned by the unbeliever (1 Corinthians 7:10-15).
The Westminster Confession summarizes the matter. It reads:
In
the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue
out a divorce; and after the divorce, to marry another as if the offending
party were dead. . . . Although the corruption of man be such as is apt to
study arguments unduly to put asunder those whom God hath joined together in
marriage; yet, nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be
remedied by the church, or the civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of
dissolving the bond of marriage; wherein, a public and orderly course of proceeding
is to be observed; and the persons concerned in it not left to their own wills,
and discretion, in their own case.1
Summary
1. The Bible does not condone “no-fault”
divorce. 2. Jesus repudiated the Pharisees’ liberal view of divorce. 3. Moses
allowed, but did not command, divorce. 4. Jesus allows divorce in the case of
sexual immorality. 5. Jesus taught that the remarriage of illegitimately
divorced persons constitutes adultery. 6. Paul adds desertion by the unbeliever
as grounds for divorce.
Biblical passages for reflection:
Matthew
5:31-32 Matthew 19:3-9 Romans 7:1-3 1
Corinthians 7:10-16
1.
Westminster Confession, art. 24:5, 6.
