Does God Hate Divorce?
By Brian Sayers
Malachi 2:10-17
This passage is profoundly relevant to a discussion of divorce as it relates to abuse and neglect. Some abused and neglected wives have been manipulated into staying in unsafe marriages on the grounds that God hates divorce, a phrase that has lifted and modified from Malachi 2:16.
Some modern English translations render a particular phrase in Malachi 2:16 with the words, “‘I hate divorce,’ says the Lord” (NASB). In the modern conservative church that phrase has become a mantra of, “God hates divorce!” Sadly for many Christians, this simple phrase encapsulates the one inviolable moral code regarding divorce and remarriage. We suggest, consistent with numerous scholars and recent translations, that both the Hebrew text and the context of the passage demand a different understanding of the phrase.
Malachi’s broader context is Yahweh’s rebuke of Israel’s hypocritical and self-righteous worship. Amid His chastening and rebuke Israel complains, “We don’t deserve this!” The prophet details their covenant unfaithfulness both to God and to one another. The idea of unfaithfulness (Hebrew, bagad)—used five times in these verses—is at the heart of this passage in Malachi.
The word bagad is often translated ‘treacherous.’ It occurs only forty-three times in the OT and is used overwhelmingly for violations of covenants. S. Erlandsson summarizes: “It is used when the OT writer wants to say that a man does not honor an agreement, or commits adultery, or breaks a covenant or some other ordinance given by God.” It is used for those who break the Sinai covenant, for those who break a betrothal covenant, and for those who break a marriage covenant.[1]
“the prophet does not direct the rebuke to those who are being treated treacherously, but to the treacherous ones themselves.”
No one suggests breaking a marriage covenant is consistent with God’s original design and ideal for marriage. However, in Malachi the prophet does not direct the rebuke to those who are being treated treacherously, but to the treacherous ones themselves. The opposite emphasis often occurs in contemporary conversations where those who are being treacherously treated (abused) are told they need to endure the suffering because “God hates divorce!” As a result, they are made to feel helplessly trapped in a harmful and seemingly hopeless relationship. At the very least, this is a horrible application of the text to those who are the true victims. We believe, however, that this common but faulty translation of Malachi 2:16 is producing not just misapplication but also a significant misunderstanding of the meaning and intent of the passage.
Though the verb for “hate” (Hebrew, sane) is in the third person masculine form, many modern translations render it in the first person (“I hate divorce”).[2] It is unnatural to emend the text in this way. “The subject of the verb ‘hates’ is not explicit: the Hebrew does not read ‘God hates’ or ‘the husband hates.’ All we know from the verb is that the person who hates is third person masculine singular (‘he’ or ‘one’), just like ‘covers.’ It is certainly not the first person ‘I hate.’”[3] It seems most natural to see the treacherous one as the one hating, divorcing, and covering his garment with violence as a result of these actions. Here is the ESV, and please note verse 16 in its context:
Malachi 2:13–16 — 13 And this second thing you do. You cover the LORD’s altar with tears, with weeping and groaning because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand. 14 But you say, “Why does he not?” Because the LORD was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. 15 Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth. 16 “For the man who does not love [“hates” – this is the term sane] his wife but divorces her, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.”
Length does not allow me to discuss all the possible nuances, but I believe this translation is better and captures the essence of the text. The NIV renders it simply, “the man who hates and divorces his wife,” which is even more literal. Though we see the “I hate” or “he [God] hates” rendering often, Roberts helpfully documents 18 modern scholars and translations (including the ESV and HCSB) which make this alternate interpretive choice.[4] I believe this translation is more accurate and if it were more broadly adopted and understood this rendering would serve to correct the common misconceptions and misapplications of the text.
This explanation requires the qualification that, though the rendering “I hate divorce” in Malachi 2:16 is not accurate, there is still a sense in which God does hate divorce because every divorce involves sin. It is simply wrong to conclude, however, that because the severing of a marriage relationship involves some sin, that God thinks identically about every party in a divorce situation. As others have said, “every divorce involves sin, but not every divorce is sinful.”[5] God hates many sins (Proverbs 6:16-19), and Scripture describes the kind of hateful and violent behavior that might justify and necessitate divorce. As well, Scripture delineates those causes as “sexual immorality” (Matthew 5:31-32; 19:3-9) and an unbeliever not being “pleased to dwell with” one’s spouse (1 Corinthians 7:12-13).
Typically, not all parties in any divorce situation are equally sinful or equally guilty. Indeed, it is possible in principle for there to be an “innocent party” in a divorce situation.[6] I disagree with using the statement “God hates divorce” when use of the phrase brings unwarranted guilt upon one of His children. God also hates sickness, death, and lying, but you should not experience guilt when those things happen to you against your will. Likewise, a person can be divorced against their will, or suffer the kind of mistreatment that biblically justifies divorce and not be “at fault” for the divorce in a way that produces unresolved guilt before God.
[1] Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible, 57. He references S. Erlandsson, “Baghadh,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. Johannes G. Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, 8 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 1:470-73, esp. p. 470.
[2] Instone-Brewer has a lengthy discussion of the translation of this passage: “The translation of verse 16a is more important, not only because it changes the sense of the verse substantially but also because it replaces the well-known and much-quoted phrase “‘I hate divorce,’ says the Lord.’” Hugenberger’s translation is based on reading the Hebrew text without emendation. The Hebrew reads ‘he hates divorce’ … which most translations emend to ‘I hate divorce.’ Hugenberger relies on Raymond Westbrook, who pointed out the parallel with ancient Near Eastern texts that use the phrase ‘He hates [and] divorces.’ He showed that this phrase meant ‘he divorces without adequate grounds.’ This was a legal distinction between a divorce that was based on grounds such as adultery or neglect … and divorce where no grounds could be cited” (ibid, 56-7).
[3] Barbara Roberts, Not Under Bondage (Australia: Maschil Press, 2008), 74.
[4] Ibid, 127-31. The summary here is balanced and helpful, providing not just “proof” of her position, but also some counter arguments and subsequent amended conclusions by many of the scholars. As she states, “there is not complete unanimity.”
[5] I have seen this attributed to Kevin DeYoung, though I first heard it from Stuart Scott.
[6] I am clearly speaking of a “relative” kind of innocence. There is no disregard for total depravity here or the truth that “there is none righteous” (Romans 3:10).