1. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” I understand that not all sound logic is “linear.” In fully considering a matter, all relevant elements, facts, and facets must be induced before correct deduction can be experienced. However, many of the false doctrines pertaining to divorcement are all over the place, having an arbitrary starting place, proceeding with no discipline, and then abruptly ending. Justified and probing questions cannot be answered and the proponents make themselves unavailable. Notwithstanding, much is black and white! (Matt. 19: 4-10, 5: 31, 32, I Cor. 7: 2f.)

2. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” Many thus reason: “Divorcement based on financial failure to provide is justified.” I Timothy 5: 8 Divorcement Matt. 5: 32, 19: 9

3. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” Many thus reason: “Remarriage is the issue, not divorcement.” They take I Corinthians 7: 11, isolate it and make it contradict verses 2 through five in the context. Such reasoning often also allows for subsequent “putting away” and marriage to another (the imperfect mate later commits adultery…).

4. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” One matter that we are hearing more of today is the so called, “Divorcement for the Kingdom of heaven’s sake.” Since I cannot read this expression in the scriptures, I must be told what it means. One preacher who has promoted this teaching more than any of whom I am aware and exerts tremendous influence, especially on young preachers teaches: "a. A person may have to divorce his mate to break an unscriptural marriage (Matt. 19: 9). In this case, one is divorcing for the kingdom of heaven's sake” (from a sermon titled, “When Is Divorce A Sin?,” by Mike Willis).

5. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” To quote this teaching more fully: “…one has an obligation to stay in his marriage until and unless his responsibilities to his mate interfere with his responsibilities to God. He must leave ‘for the kingdom of heaven's sake….’A person may have to leave his mate to become or remain a Christian (Luke 18: 29-30; 1Cor. 7: 15; Matt. 10: 34-48; Luke 14: 26). In this case, one is divorcing for the kingdom of heaven's sake.” (Mike Willis, Ibid.).

6. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” It is important that we point out that the proponents of “divorce for the Kingdom’s sake” typically start with an illustration, mix it with other cases that are of a different sort, and then draw a conclusion, a conclusion that they apply to both sets of examples. I say this because in their general application, they are referring to marriages having a bond or marriages that God has joined. In their first case (“a.”), it is a marriage to which the couple has no right at all and it is fornication. Hence, any “divorce” in the first case would simply and only be civil compliance, since there was never a marriage bond.

7. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” Proof verses for multiple causes: “26: If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14). Jesus is teaching that his followers must love him more than all others. To use this verse to teach divorce for a cause other than fornication is to make one verse contradict another (Matt. 19: 4f.).

8. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” “29: And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake….” (Luke 18). Jesus’ statement is in answer to Peter’s question (vs. 28-30). To imagine that Jesus is teaching divorce for reasons other than what he has expressly taught is utter and irresponsible use of the scriptures. Jesus does not even have in mind marital difficulties such as a mate incurring bills, children abuse, or one’s emotional health.

9. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” Jesus taught only one reason for divorcement for an apparent reason: To preclude all the chaos that has now been introduced by those not content with Jesus’ teaching. Jesus’ reason plus….do not equal one reason, regardless of how “fair” these other reasons may sound. I certainly believe in putting Jesus first over all, including a mate (Luke 14: 26, 18: 29). However, I do not believe such entails divorcement and the rejection of the marriage duties that we have accepted when we engage in the marriage vows (I Cor. 7: 2f.).

10. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” “I've read your article a couple of times to make sure I understood what you said. While I am in agreement that I would not tell a person to divorce, for the number of reasons presented by Mike, there still are a couple problems with your answer. 1. You are incorrect about the divorced mate running off and ‘marrying another’ that Mike (and many others who hold a similar position) believe that mate could now scripturally remarried anyone. They don't believe it and I have never seen anything in print or tape that says they do. Just because you think it is evitable position in the future does not make it so. 2. You, along with many others, taking issue with the ‘kingdom sake’ argument do not offer one word about what the passage DOES MEAN! In you article you go to great length to tell us that it doesn't mean what Brother Willis believes it means, what can happen if one takes that position and that it contradicts other Bible passages. Yet, Don it has to mean something and ignoring it won't make it go away! Don, I wish that this problem could be dealt with in an open fashion and have tried to do so with the men I don't agree with some of their conclusions. I continue to pray and be open to discuss the teachings on both side of the issues. While I have never wavered on my understanding of MDR I must admit there are some situations only the Lord know the answer…. I'm always hesitate to get into discussion with you because I know in the past you have used my words to portray me as soft and compromising….”

11. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” Primary arguments based on false charges: “Addendum 2: Since I have mentioned Mike Willis, I believe I should state that I personally do not know what Mike teaches regarding the possibility of marriage to another after the ‘wrong mate’ marries. However, through the years, I have observed that most of these men will concede the possibility of marriage to another, even in the circumstance of a living mate, using the same flawed and emotional reasoning that resulted in their first erroneous conclusion.” (Direct quote from my article, dm.)

12. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s Sake” Consequences: These men thus teaching have not only created basic and initial error, but they have also helped to open the door for all the current flood of false teaching on divorce and marriage to another. “Divorcement for the Kingdom’s sake” is a flawed and deceitful expression, such as plays on “divorcement.”