The point here is that when we are dealing with two professing Christians, instead of going to the secular court system, we need to entrust our case with the church. Family matters should be dealt with “in house”. Now that doesn’t mean that the two parties have to hash it out alone, or that one is automatically let off the hook if they cannot come to an agreement. You try and work it out together, and then if you need help you go to the church for mediation. If a professing Christian tries to claim these verses as justification of why you cannot have any recourse against them, and then they won’t submit to the church and its diligent judgment and due process, then that person is only trying to use the bible as a means to avoid responsibility.
This passage and its implications about nominal Christianity speak volumes. The principle derived from God’s character applies. For example, it should be obvious to Christians that they cannot just claim, “God hates divorce”, etc., etc, when a man beats his wife, uses all the money to buy drugs, abandons her for days on end, and then won’t submit to church discipline. Then that man wants to believe he can claim scriptural warrant? Preposterous! If the man willfully does these things, he may have a problem and may be able to be rehabilitated, brought to repentance, and restored, reconciled, etc. The man or woman is not free in the Lord to divorce without consent of the church. However, if a person won’t even submit to God’s way through the process of a restorative church discipline model, he is either fooling himself, and/or lying to God and us about his supposed conversion to Christ. |
