“In the past, when asked if divorce could ever be a viable option for these women, my typical response has been a reluctant no. As much as my heart went out to these women trapped in horrific marriages, I simply didn’t see any biblical justification for divorce in situations of porn use.”

“I am hurting so much over this…If I believed in divorce I would already have done it, and I am beginning to maybe believe divorce is ok. After all, this seems like a type of adultery to me. Am I wrong?” – Mary Ann

After writing more than 1,200 articles for Covenant Eyes and having replied to too many comments and e-mails to count, undoubtedly the most heart-wrenching stories I hear are from women who are living with a porn-addicted husband.

When a woman has discovered her husband is entrenched in pornography, reactions can vary greatly, but for many women it is nothing short of traumatic. Whether she’s dealing with the initial blow of uncovering a 20-year-long secret addiction, or she’s facing the daily blow of her husband’s coldness, for these women their life feels like a living hell.

In the past, when asked if divorce could ever be a viable option for these women, my typical response has been a reluctant no. As much as my heart went out to these women trapped in horrific marriages, I simply didn’t see any biblical justification for divorce in situations of porn use.

About a year ago I decided I was going to write my Master’s thesis about this topic and had intended to write a robust biblical defense of my position.

I never imaged I would come to the opposite conclusion.

Some Caveats

Before we launch into this issue, let me state a few caveats.

1. Divorce is ugly. We must acknowledge, when addressing the subject of grounds for divorce, the situation that even prompts us to ask this question is under divine judgment. It is a question that involves real hearts, real homes, and a real God who really hates divorce. So it is with great sobriety that we take up this study.
2. Having grounds for divorce is not the same as actually getting divorced. This article seeks to answer the grounds question as it relates to pornography. But having legitimate grounds for divorce does not necessitate divorce.
3. This article is long and heady. This is not a delicate how-to article for couples in crisis. It is a clumsy attempt to summarize a 33,000-word theological Master’s thesis. Reader be warned.
4. The opinions expressed here are my own. Divorce is a contentious issue, and I won’t dare to assume a single article forever settles the debates. I only hope it is a significant addition to the discussion.

The Central Text: Matthew 19:9

The locus of the debate about whether pornography use is ground for divorce is Matthew 19:9:

“I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

Time and space do not permit me to get into every detail of this text, but a few observations are important:

1. This comment comes after a very strong affirmation about the divine intention for marriage. Just a few verses prior, Jesus says, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (Matthew 19:4-5).

Jesus uses a type of exegesis common early rabbinic Judaism called gezerah shavah, where the activity of God in the first text (making us male and female) is inferred in the second text (the two becoming one flesh). Thus, God is one who joins man and woman together in the covenant bond of marriage. God is the one who unites husband and wife in whole-life oneness. Therefore, what God has joined together, man should not separate (v.6). Marriage is meant to be a lifelong, loving covenant bond.

2. Jesus strikes at the Pharisees’ liberal view of marriage by saying all remarriages after invalid divorces are adulterous. In Jesus’ day, the majority position, promoted by Rabbi Hillel, was “any cause” divorce: any kind of indecency—real or imaginary—was grounds for divorce. As such, divorce was actually quite common among the Pharisees. This view is reflected in the Pharisee’s opening question to Jesus: “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” (19:3, italics added). In other words, “Jesus, do you agree with Hillel’s position on divorce?”

Jesus’ answer is ruthlessly conservative: getting remarried to another is adultery after getting an invalid divorce. Jesus uses similar logic in other divorce texts (Matthew 5:32; Mark 10:12; Luke 16:18). Against all the cultural expectations of young men to get married, after hearing Jesus’ brazenly conservative view, even the disciples second-guess whether marriage is worth it (Matthew 19:10). Nonetheless, Jesus is stalwart in his view, assaulting the very attitude behind the Pharisees’ question. Marriage is never to be thought of as a casual union, subject to the cavalier whims of an lordly male. Marriage must be treated with respect and reverence.

3. Jesus nuances His view with an exception clause. Jesus’ conservative approach does not mean all marriages are completely undissolvable. After a marriage is severed, remarriage to another is not adulterous in the case of πορνείᾳ (porneia)—sexual immorality.

The majority Protestant position understands porneia to include any illicit sexual intercourse outside of marriage.*

The critical matter for our consideration is this: Would Jesus include pornography use as a divorcible offense?

Straw-Man Arguments

Generally, when I bump into those who think porn use can be grounds for divorce, I come across three very bad arguments. In the past, the weakness of these arguments kept me firmly convinced that pornography in itself could never be biblical grounds for divorce.

Bad Argument #1: Pornography is detrimental to a marriage, therefore it is grounds for divorce.

I agree pornography can be detrimental to a marriage, but grounds for divorce ought not be determined by how detrimental a sin is.

Some theologians want to stretch the definition of porneia to the breaking point, saying it encompasses all manner of offenses like emotional or physical abuse, blasphemy, or other generally destructive behavior. Quite simply, regardless of what we say about these terrible offenses, there’s nothing about the term porneia that suggests these meanings.

Bad Argument #2: Porn = Lust = Adultery = Grounds for Divorce

Viewing porn generally involves lust. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said the man who looks at a woman lustfully commits adultery with her in his heart (Matthew 5:28). Jesus also said adultery is grounds for divorce—if we take porneia to mean adultery (Matthew 5:32; 19:9). Therefore, it is argued, viewing porn must be grounds for divorce.

There are a couple major problems with this argument. First, it misapplies Jesus’ own words. The intention of Jesus’ teachings in the Sermon on the Mount is to help His disciples understand the heart of the Law (Matthew 5:17). For instance, Jesus said to be innocent of murder is not enough; anger is also sinful and worthy judgment before the court and ultimately hellfire (v.21-22). It would be wrong to take Jesus’ hyperbolic comments about punishing anger and suggest we set up a formal tribunal to dish out penalties to those who speak harsh words to others. Similarly, to suggest spouses have grounds for divorce for moments of lust goes far beyond Jesus’ intention.

Second, to suggest instances of lust provide grounds for divorce is to give nearly any spouse in the world grounds for divorce. This liberalizes Jesus’ position so much it makes Him look like the Pharisees he was rebuking.

Bad Argument #3: Pornography Comes from the Word Porneia

Some use a linguistic argument showing porneia’s relationship to the modern term “pornography.” The term “pornography,” meaning “writings of/about prostitutes,” stems from the Greek porn– word group.

However, this is an exegetical fallacy. To interpret a Greek term by how that term has impacted modern languages leads to illegitimate conclusions. For instance, when the Bible says, “God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Corinthians 9:8), it uses the term ἱλαρός (hilaros) from which we get the English word “hilarious.” If we tried to use a modern definition of “hilarious” to help us define the meaning of the original Greek term, we would come to erroneous conclusions. This makes a mistake of chronology: the Greek authors of the New Testament are not responsible for the development of another language hundreds of years after they wrote their materials.

Read More