Rejoice With the Wife of Your Youth”

“Rejoice with the wife of your youth . . . Why should you, my son, be in an ecstasy
with a strange woman?”—PROVERBS 5:18, 20.

THE Bible is not prudish about sexual relations. At Proverbs 5:18, 19, we read: “Let your water
source prove to be blessed, and rejoice with the wife of your youth, a lovable hind and a charming
mountain goat. Let her own breasts intoxicate you at all times. With her love may you be in an
ecstasy constantly.”
2
Here the term “water source” refers to the source of sexual satisfaction. It is blessed in that
the feeling of romantic love and ecstasy enjoyed between marriage mates is a gift from God. This
intimacy, though, is to be experienced strictly within the marital arrangement. So King Solomon of
ancient Israel, a writer of Proverbs, rhetorically asks: “Why should you, my son, be in an ecstasy
with a strange woman or embrace the bosom of a foreign woman?”—Proverbs 5:20.
3
On their wedding day, a man and a woman make a solemn commitment to love each other
and to stay faithful. Nevertheless, many marriages are shattered by adultery. In fact, after
analyzing more than two dozen studies, one researcher concluded that “25 percent of wives and
44 percent of husbands have had extramarital intercourse.” The apostle Paul stated: “Do not be
misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor
men who lie with men . . . will inherit God’s kingdom.” (1 Corinthians 6:9, 10) There is no question
about it. Adultery is a serious sin in God’s eyes, and true worshippers must guard against marital
infidelity. What will help us to ‘keep marriage honorable, and the marriage bed without
defilement’?—Hebrews 13:4.
Beware of a Treacherous Heart
4
In today’s debased moral climate, many people “have eyes full of adultery and [are] unable
to desist from sin.” (2 Peter 2:14) They willfully pursue romantic relationships outside of marriage.
In some lands a large number of women have entered the workforce, and the gender mix has
created fertile soil for improper office romances to develop. Then, too, Internet chat rooms have
made it easy for even the most timid of individuals to strike up intimate friendships online. Many
married people fall into such traps without realizing what is happening to them.
5
Consider how a Christian whom we will call Mary got caught in a situation that brought her
dangerously close to committing sexual immorality. Her husband, who is not one of Jehovah’s
Witnesses, displayed very little affection for his family. Mary recalls a time some years ago when
she met one of her husband’s coworkers. The man was quite mannerly, and on a later occasion,
he even expressed interest in Mary’s religious beliefs. “He was so nice, so different from my
husband,” she says. Soon Mary and her husband’s coworker were romantically involved. “I
haven’t committed adultery,” she reasoned, “and the man is interested in the Bible. Maybe I can
help him.”
6
Before her romantic attachment led to adultery, Mary came to her senses. (Galatians 5:19-
21; Ephesians 4:19) Her conscience began working, and she proceeded to set matters straight.
Mary’s experience illustrates that “the heart is more treacherous than anything else and is
desperate.” (Jeremiah 17:9) The Bible admonishes us: “More than all else that is to be guarded,
safeguard your heart.” (Proverbs 4:23) How can we do so?
‘The Shrewd One Proceeds to Conceal Himself’
7
“Let him that thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall,” wrote the apostle Paul.
(1 Corinthians 10:12) And Proverbs 22:3 states: “Shrewd is the one that has seen the calamity
and proceeds to conceal himself.” Rather than overconfidently thinking, ‘Nothing will happen to
me,’ you are wise to anticipate situations that could lead to problems. For example, avoid
becoming the sole confidant of someone of the opposite sex who is experiencing perplexing
difficulties in marriage. (Proverbs 11:14) Tell the person that marital problems are best discussed
with his mate, with a mature Christian of the same sex who wants his union to succeed, or with
the elders. (Titus 2:3, 4) The elders in congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses set a fine example

1
in this regard. When an elder needs to speak privately with a Christian sister, he does so in a
public setting—such as at the Kingdom Hall.
8
In the workplace and elsewhere, beware of situations that might foster intimacy. For
example, spending extra hours working closely with someone of the opposite sex can set the
stage for temptation. As a married man or woman, you should make it clear by your speech and
your demeanor that you are simply not available. As one who pursues godly devotion, you would
certainly not want to invite undue attention by flirting or by being immodest in your dress and
grooming. (1 Timothy 4:8; 6:11; 1 Peter 3:3, 4) Having photos of your marriage mate and children
around the workplace will serve as a visual reminder to you and to others that you have priorities.
Be determined never to encourage—or even tolerate—seductive overtures from another.—Job
31:1.
“See Life With the Wife Whom You Love”
9
Safeguarding the heart calls for more than avoiding dangerous situations. A romantic
attraction to someone outside the marriage could be an indication that a husband and a wife are
not attentive to each other’s needs. It might be that a wife is continually ignored or a husband is
constantly criticized. Suddenly another person—whether encountered on the job or even in the
Christian congregation—seems to possess the very qualities that are lacking in one’s mate. Soon
a bond forms, and the new relationship becomes almost irresistibly alluring. This subtle chain of
events confirms the truthfulness of the Bible’s statement: “Each one is tried by being drawn out
and enticed by his own desire.”—James 1:14.
10
Rather than looking outside the marriage to satisfy their desires—whether for affection, for
friendship, or for support during a challenging ordeal—husbands and wives should work to
solidify a loving relationship with their mate. By all means, then, spend time together, and draw
closer to each other. Reflect on what caused you to fall in love. Try to recapture the warmth you
felt toward the person who became your spouse. Think of the good times you have enjoyed
together. Pray to God about the matter. The psalmist David implored Jehovah: “Create in me
even a pure heart, O God, and put within me a new spirit, a steadfast one.” (Psalm 51:10) Be
determined to ‘see life with the wife whom you love all the days of your life that God has given
you under the sun.’—Ecclesiastes 9:9.
11
Not to be overlooked in strengthening the marriage bond is the value of knowledge, wisdom,
and discernment. Proverbs 24:3, 4 states: “By wisdom a household will be built up, and by
discernment it will prove firmly established. And by knowledge will the interior rooms be filled with
all precious and pleasant things of value.” Included among the precious things filling a happy
household are such qualities as love, loyalty, godly fear, and faith. Acquiring these calls for the
knowledge of God. Married couples, then, should be serious students of the Bible. And how
important are wisdom and discernment? Successfully coping with day-to-day problems requires
wisdom, the ability to apply Scriptural knowledge. A person with discernment is able to
understand the thoughts and feelings of his or her mate. (Proverbs 20:5) “My son, to my wisdom
O do pay attention,” says Jehovah, through Solomon. “To my discernment incline your ears.”—
Proverbs 5:1.
When There Is “Tribulation”
12
No marriage is perfect. The Bible even says that husbands and wives will have “tribulation in
their flesh.” (1 Corinthians 7:28) Anxieties, sickness, persecution, and other factors can place
stress upon a marriage. When problems arise, however, you need to look for solutions together
as loyal marriage mates seeking to please Jehovah.
13
What if the marriage is under stress because of the way that the mates treat each other?
The search for a solution takes effort. For instance, it may be that a pattern of unkind speech has
crept into their marriage and now characterizes it. (Proverbs 12:18) As discussed in the preceding
article, this can have devastating effects. A Bible proverb says: “Better is it to dwell in a
wilderness land than with a contentious wife along with vexation.” (Proverbs 21:19) If you are a
wife in such a marriage, ask yourself, ‘Is my disposition making it difficult for my husband to be
around me?’ The Bible tells husbands: “Keep on loving your wives and do not be bitterly angry

2
with them.” (Colossians 3:19) If you are a husband, ask yourself, ‘Is my demeanor cold, tempting
my wife to seek comfort elsewhere?’ Of course, there is no excuse for sexual immorality. Yet, the
fact that such a tragedy could happen is good reason to discuss problems openly.
14
Seeking solace in a romance outside of marriage is not the answer to marital problems.
Where could such a relationship lead? To a new and better marriage? Some may think so. ‘After
all,’ they argue, ‘this person has the very qualities I need in a mate.’ But such reasoning is false,
for anyone who would leave his or her mate—or encourage you to leave yours—has a serious
disregard for the sanctity of marriage. It is unreasonable to expect that relationship to result in a
better marriage.
15
Mary, mentioned earlier, gave sober thought to the consequences of her course, including
the possibility of causing herself or someone else to lose God’s favor. (Galatians 6:7) “As I began
examining my feelings for my husband’s coworker,” she says, “I realized that if there was ever a
chance that this man could come to a knowledge of the truth, I was working against it.
Wrongdoing would adversely affect everyone involved and stumble others!”—2 Corinthians 6:3.
The Strongest Incentive
16
The Bible warns: “As a honeycomb the lips of a strange woman keep dripping, and her
palate is smoother than oil. But the aftereffect from her is as bitter as wormwood; it is as sharp as
a two-edged sword.” (Proverbs 5:3, 4) The aftereffects of moral uncleanness are painful and can
be deadly. They include a troubled conscience, sexually transmitted diseases, and the emotional
devastation of the mate of the unfaithful individual. Surely this is reason not to start down a path
that can lead to marital infidelity.
17
The fundamental reason why marital unfaithfulness is wrong is that Jehovah, the Originator
of marriage and the Bestower of sexual capacity, condemns it. Through the prophet Malachi, He
says: “I will come near to you people for the judgment, and I will become a speedy witness
against . . . the adulterers.” (Malachi 3:5) Regarding what Jehovah sees, Proverbs 5:21 states:
“The ways of man are in front of the eyes of Jehovah, and he is contemplating all his tracks.” Yes,
“all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of him with whom we have an accounting.”
(Hebrews 4:13) The strongest incentive for maintaining marital fidelity, then, is the realization that
no matter how secret an infidelity might be and how minor its physical or social consequences
might seem, any act of sexual uncleanness damages our relationship with Jehovah.
18
The example of Joseph, son of the patriarch Jacob, shows that the desire to remain at
peace with God is a powerful incentive. Having found favor in the eyes of Potiphar, a court official
of Pharaoh, Joseph came to have a privileged position in Potiphar’s household. Joseph was also
“beautiful in form and beautiful in appearance,” a fact that did not escape the notice of Potiphar’s
wife. Every day, she tried to seduce Joseph, but her efforts bore no fruit. What caused Joseph to
resist all her advances? The Bible tells us: “He would refuse and would say to his master’s wife:
‘Here my master . . . has not withheld from me anything at all except you, because you are his
wife. So how could I commit this great badness and actually sin against God?’”—Genesis 39:1-
12.
19
Unmarried Joseph maintained moral chastity by refusing to get involved with another man’s
wife. “Drink water out of your own cistern,” says Proverbs 5:15 to married men, “and tricklings out
of the midst of your own well.” Guard against even unwittingly forming romantic attachments
outside of marriage. Put forth the effort to strengthen the bond of love in your own marriage, and
work hard to resolve whatever marital difficulties you may encounter. By all means, “rejoice with
the wife of your youth.”—Proverbs 5:18.
What Did You Learn?
• How may a Christian unwittingly become ensnared in a romantic relationship?
• What precautions can help one to keep from forming a romantic attachment outside the
marriage?
• When experiencing problems, what should a married couple do?

3
• What is the strongest incentive for maintaining marital fidelity?

A Lesson From the Stork

“EVEN the stork in the heavens—it well knows its appointed times . . . But as for my people,
they have not come to know the judgment of Jehovah.” (Jeremiah 8:7) With those words, the
prophet Jeremiah sounded Jehovah’s judgment against the apostate people of Judah, who had
left Jehovah their God and turned to the worship of foreign deities. (Jeremiah 7:18, 31) Why did
Jeremiah choose the stork as an object lesson for the unfaithful Jews?
To the Israelites, the stork, and especially the white stork, was a familiar sight as it migrated
through Bible lands. The Hebrew name for this large, long-legged wading bird is the feminine
form of a word that means “loyal one; one of loving-kindness.” This is fitting, for unlike most other
birds, male and female white storks remain paired for life. After wintering in warmer regions, most
storks return year after year, often to the same nest that they have used before.
The stork’s instinctive behavior illustrates the quality of loyalty in other remarkable ways. Both
male and female birds share in incubating the eggs and feeding the chicks. The book Our
Magnificent Wildlife explains: “As parents, storks are exceptionally faithful. A male stork in
Germany flew into high-tension wires and was electrocuted. His mate continued to incubate the
eggs alone for 3 days, during which she left the nest only once for a short time to look for
food. . . . In another case, when the female stork was shot, the father reared the young.”
Indeed, by instinctively showing faithfulness to its lifelong mate and tender care for its young,
the stork lives up to the meaning of its name—“loyal one.” Thus, storks served well as a powerful
lesson to the unfaithful and wayward Israelites.
To many people today, loyalty and faithfulness are quaint ideas—admirable but not practical.
The proliferation of divorce, abandonment, embezzlement, and other forms of deceit
demonstrates that loyalty is no longer valued. In contrast, the Bible places a high value on loyalty
that is motivated by love and kindness. It urges Christians to “put on the new personality which
was created according to God’s will in true righteousness and loyalty.” (Ephesians 4:24) Yes, the
new personality helps us to be loyal, but we can also learn a lesson about loyalty from the stork.

How to Strengthen Marriage Bonds

“IS IT lawful for a man to divorce his wife on every sort of ground?” asked the Pharisees who
were trying to trap the Great Teacher, Jesus Christ. He answered them by referring to the first
human marriage and set out a standard on the matter: “What God has yoked together let no man
put apart.”
The Pharisees contended that Moses made provisions for divorce by prescribing the issuing of
“a certificate of dismissal.” Jesus answered them: “Moses, out of regard for your
hardheartedness, made the concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such has not been the
case from the beginning. I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of
fornication, and marries another commits adultery.”—Matthew 19:3-9.
Originally, marriage was to be a permanent bond. Even death would not have parted the first
married couple, for they were created as perfect humans with everlasting life in view. However,
they sinned. Their sin marred human marriage. The enemy death began to separate married
couples. God views death as the end of a marriage, as we read in the Bible: “A wife is bound
during all the time her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep in death, she is free

4
to be married to whom she wants, only in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 7:39) This is very different
from such religious ideas as suttee, wherein a wife at the time of her husband’s death is
persuaded or coerced into burning herself to death in the belief that the marriage bond continues
on into some afterlife.
Mosaic Law Provision
By the time the Mosaic Law was given, marital relationships had deteriorated to the point that
Jehovah, out of regard for the Israelites’ hardheartedness, made a provision for divorce.
(Deuteronomy 24:1) It was not God’s purpose for the Israelites to misuse this law to divorce their
wives because of petty faults, as is evident from his command that they were to love their fellow
as themselves. (Leviticus 19:18) Even the issuing of a certificate of divorce served as a deterrent
because, as part of the process of writing the certificate, the husband wanting a divorce had to
consult duly authorized men, who would have endeavored to effect a reconciliation. No, God did
not give this law to establish any right to divorce one’s wife “on every sort of ground.”—Matthew
19:3.
However, the Israelites eventually ignored the spirit of the law and exploited this clause to get
divorced on whatever basis suited their whims. By the fifth century B.C.E., they were dealing
treacherously with the wives of their youth, divorcing them on all sorts of grounds. Jehovah firmly
told them that he hated a divorcing. (Malachi 2:14-16) It was against this background that Jesus
condemned divorce as the Israelites were practicing it in his day.
Only Legitimate Basis for Divorce
Jesus did, though, mention one legitimate basis for divorce: fornication. (Matthew 5:31, 32;
19:8, 9) The word here translated “fornication” includes all sorts of illicit sexual intercourse outside
Scriptural marriage, be it with someone of the same sex or the opposite sex or with an animal.
Even so, Jesus was not recommending divorce from unfaithful partners. It is up to the
innocent mate to weigh the consequences involved and decide whether he or she wants a
divorce. Wives contemplating a divorce on this Scriptural basis may also want to consider God’s
statement when he passed judgment on the first woman for her sin. In addition to the death
sentence, God specifically told Eve: “Your craving will be for your husband, and he will dominate
you.” (Genesis 3:16) The Commentary on the Old Testament, by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch,
describes this “craving” as “a desire bordering upon disease.” Admittedly, this craving is not that
strong in every wife, but when an innocent wife is considering a divorce, she would be wise to
take into consideration the emotional needs that women have inherited from Eve. However, as
extramarital sex on the part of a guilty mate could lead to an innocent mate’s being infected by
sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS, some have decided to resort to divorce as
explained by Jesus.
Seeds of Family Trouble Sown
People’s hardheartedness finds its origin in the sin that the first human couple committed
against God. (Romans 5:12) The seeds of family strife were sown when the first human pair
sinned against their heavenly Father. How so? When the first woman, Eve, was tempted by a
serpent to eat from the forbidden tree, she went right ahead and ate the fruit. It was only after she
had made that significant decision that she talked to her husband about what the serpent had told
her. (Genesis 3:6) Yes, she had acted without consulting her husband. Here is the prototype of
problems faced by many families today—lack of heart-to-heart communication.
Later, when faced with the consequences of their sin, both Adam and Eve resorted to the
same tactics that many couples employ today when in trouble, namely, blaming others. The first
man, Adam, blamed what he had done both on his wife and on Jehovah, saying: “The woman
whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree and so I ate.” The woman in turn
said: “The serpent—it deceived me and so I ate.”—Genesis 3:12, 13.
Jehovah’s pronouncement of judgment on Adam and Eve forecast yet another factor in the
troubles that would develop. Concerning her relationship with her husband, Jehovah told Eve:
“He will dominate you.” Many husbands today, like Isao mentioned in our first article, dominate

5
their wives in a ruthless way without regard for their wives’ feelings. Still, many wives continue to
have a craving for their husbands’ attention. When that craving is not satisfied, the wives may
demand that attention and act selfishly. With many a husband dominating and many a wife
craving, selfishness prevails, and peace flies out the window. In a paper entitled “How to Analyze
Today’s Divorces,” Shunsuke Serizawa said: “If we overlook the tendency at the heart of the
issue of ‘having one’s own way,’ namely, giving priority to one’s own interests, it would suddenly
become impossible to analyze divorces today.”
Jehovah has, however, provided guidance in his Word so that obedient married couples can
enjoy a measure of marital happiness even in their imperfect state. Isao followed God’s direction
and is now enjoying a happy family life. Let us see how Bible principles help people to strengthen
the marital bond.
Talk Things Out
In many marriages, a lack of communication, the tendency to blame others, and selfish
attitudes make it difficult for husband and wife to understand each other’s emotions.
“Preconditioned on the sharing of feelings, intimacy requires consummate trust. And today trust is
in short supply,” says researcher Caryl S. Avery. An accumulation of shared innermost feelings
builds up such trust. This requires heart-to-heart communication between husband and wife.
Proverbs uses an illustration to encourage the sharing of intimate thoughts, saying: “Counsel
in the heart of a man is as deep waters, but the man of discernment is one that will draw it up.”
(Proverbs 20:5) Marriage mates must be discerning and draw up the thoughts deep down in their
spouses’ hearts. Imagine that your mate is upset. Instead of responding: “I’ve had a hard day
myself,” why not kindly ask: “Did you have a hard day? What happened?” It may take time and
effort to listen to your spouse, but it is usually more pleasant, satisfying, and timesaving to spend
time that way than it is to ignore your mate and have to deal with charged emotions that erupt
later.
To gain trust, each must be honest and try to express feelings in a way that the other mate
can understand. “Speak truth,” urges God’s Word, “because we are members belonging to one
another.” (Ephesians 4:25) Speaking truth requires discernment. Suppose a wife feels that she is
not being heard. Before she speaks, she should consider the proverb: “Anyone holding back his
sayings is possessed of knowledge, and a man of discernment is cool of spirit.” (Proverbs 17:27)
Rather than accuse her husband, “You never listen to me!” it would be far better calmly to
express her feelings before frustration and disappointment build up within her. Perhaps she could
reveal how she feels by saying something like, “I know you are busy, but having a little more time
with you would make me very happy.”
Really, “there is a frustrating of plans where there is no confidential talk.” (Proverbs 15:22)
Your mate loves you, but that does not mean that she can read your mind. You must let your
mate know how you feel in a tactful way. This will help you, as a Christian married couple, to
make loving adjustments in order “to observe the oneness of the spirit in the uniting bond of
peace.”—Ephesians 4:2, 3.
Take Kazuo, for example, who was a henpecked husband with an itch for gambling. He found
himself bogged down with debts amounting to several hundred thousand dollars. Borrowing
money to pay off his debts, he sank deeper into the mire. Then he started to study the Bible and
finally mustered up the courage to tell his wife about his problems. He was prepared to face her
accusations. However, he was taken by surprise when his wife, who had been studying the Bible
longer, calmly answered: “Let’s try to figure out how we can pay off the debts.”
Starting the following day, they visited their creditors and began to pay their debts, even
selling their house. It took almost a year to settle the debts. What changed Kimie, his wife? She
says: “The words found at Philippians chapter 4, verses 6 and 7, are indeed true. ‘Do not be
anxious over anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication along with thanksgiving let
your petitions be made known to God; and the peace of God that excels all thought will guard
your hearts and your mental powers by means of Christ Jesus.’” She added: “A friend of mine,

6
surprised at seeing how cheerful I was despite hardships, started studying the Bible with me.”
Kazuo and his wife have since been baptized and are now enjoying a happy family life.
In addition to trusting each other by telling the truth, the husbands and wives who had the
above experiences did something that helps couples to solve their marital problems. They
communicated with the Originator of the marriage arrangement, Jehovah God. Despite pressures
and difficulties that couples face, he will bless them with the peace of God that excels all thought
if they do their best to apply his principles and leave the rest in his hand. Praying together is
especially helpful. The husband should take the lead and ‘pour out his heart’ before God, seeking
his guidance and direction on any problem that he and his wife are facing. (Psalm 62:8) Jehovah
God will definitely hear such prayers.
Yes, it is possible to strengthen the bond of marriage. Even now, living with all our
imperfections in a turbulent society, married couples can find considerable joy in their
relationship. You can find additional practical suggestions and godly counsel in the book Making
Your Family Life Happy, published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.
Moreover, couples who earnestly work to apply Bible principles have the hope of being bound
together in love in the soon-to-come new world of God’s making.

Divorce—What Does the Bible Really Say?

“WHAT God has yoked together let no man put apart.” (Matthew 19:6) We often hear those
well-known words by Jesus Christ quoted as the final pronouncement in a marriage ceremony.
By those words, though, did Jesus mean that all marriages are to be permanent and that there
is not to be any divorce whatsoever? Taking the words by themselves, that would appear to be
the case. However, what prompted Jesus to make such a statement? Was he setting out
something new?
‘Not the Case From the Beginning’
Jesus’ statement quoted above was part of his answer to the Pharisees’ question: “Is it lawful
for a man to divorce his wife on every sort of ground?” (Matthew 19:3-6) Not being satisfied with
the answer, the Pharisees questioned him further by asking: “Why, then, did Moses prescribe
giving a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her?” Thereupon, Jesus said: “Moses, out of regard
for your hardheartedness, made the concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such has not
been the case from the beginning.” Then he added: “I say to you that whoever divorces his
wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery.”—Matthew 19:7-
9.
We must note that Jesus’ statement, “such has not been the case from the beginning,” was
made in reference to divorce that was accomplished by “giving a certificate of dismissal.” In other
words, when God instituted the first marriage between Adam and Eve, he did not provide them
with “every sort of ground” for dissolving their marriage. As a perfect couple, they had every
reason to make their marriage a success. It would be successful if they continued to live
according to God’s law and direction.
When mankind lapsed into sin and imperfection, so did the institution of marriage. (Romans
5:12) Since humans were no longer perfect, human relations became strained and tainted by
selfishness, greed, and self-interest. That was what Jesus referred to as “hardheartedness,”
because of which the Mosaic Law made room for divorce. Yet, Jesus reminded the Pharisees:
“Such has not been the case from the beginning.” Now, under imperfect conditions, mates should
put forth the effort needed to resolve any difficulties and problems instead of using them as
grounds or excuses for breaking up their marriage. However, Jesus pointed out that there is one
exception, namely, fornication. Marital infidelity can be grounds for breaking up a marriage.
It is interesting to note how various explanations of the clause “except on the ground of
fornication” have been put forth to uphold certain views on divorce. Catholic authorities generally

7
dismiss this clause on the ground that parallel accounts in Mark and Luke do not contain it.
However, McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia explains: “The plain reconciliation of the passages
must be found in the principle that an exception in a fuller document must explain a briefer one, if
this can be done without force. Now, as divorce for that one reason was admitted by all, Mark and
Luke might naturally take this for granted without expressing it.”
Some argue that since Jesus used the word “fornication” (Greek, por·nei´a) and not “adultery”
(Greek, moi·khei´a), he must have meant some improper act before the marriage that would
make the marriage null and void. This is unnecessarily restricting the meaning of the word.
Various authorities recognize that por·nei´a means “unchastity, harlotry, prostitution, fornication,”
and that at Matthew 19:9 “it stands for, or includes, adultery.” Others argue that Jesus was citing
fornication merely as one example among many grounds for divorce. Clearly, this is forcing an
opinion on the text.
From the foregoing, it is clear that the Bible does not say that all marriages are to remain
permanent and no divorce is permissible for any reason at all. On the other hand, the Bible
provides only one acceptable basis for divorce, namely, “the ground of fornication.”
“Let Marriage Be Honorable”
By allowing a ground for divorce, does the Bible encourage it? Does this allowance trivialize
marriage or rob it of its dignity? Or by allowing only one ground for divorce, is the Bible placing an
unreasonable burden on those who marry?
Quite to the contrary, the Bible speaks of marriage as one of the closest and most intimate
bonds that two people can enjoy. “A man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to
his wife and they must become one flesh,” says the Genesis account of the first marriage.
(Genesis 2:24) And mates are to guard this “one flesh” relationship as something precious. “Let
marriage be honorable among all, and the marriage bed be without defilement,” counsels the
Bible.—Hebrews 13:4.
It has often been said, in one manner or another, that the foundation of a lasting and happy
marriage is not romantic love but unselfishness. That is just what the Bible indicates. It says:
“Husbands ought to be loving their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves
himself, for no man ever hated his own flesh; but he feeds and cherishes it, as the Christ also
does the congregation. . . . On the other hand, the wife should have deep respect for her
husband.” (Ephesians 5:28-33) And in frank language, the Bible counsels: “Let the husband
render to his wife her due; but let the wife also do likewise to her husband. The wife does not
exercise authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, also, the husband does not
exercise authority over his own body, but his wife does. Do not be depriving each other of it.”—
1 Corinthians 7:3-5.
When both mates are willing to abide by such wise counsel, it is very unlikely that their
marriage will deteriorate to the point where one of them would resort to extramarital affairs, thus,
in effect, destroying the “one flesh” relationship. Even if one of the mates does not accept such
Bible principles, the believing mate can have confidence that God’s way is still the best, and
many marital problems can thus be solved or avoided.
Rather than recommending divorce as a means of ending an unhappy marriage, then, the
Bible urges Christians to work hard to hold their marriage together and to make it a happy one.
“Rejoice with the wife of your youth,” says a Bible proverb. “With her love may you be in an
ecstasy constantly.”—Proverbs 5:18, 19.
Is Divorce the Answer?
What if one’s marriage mate does become unfaithful? To be sure, marital infidelity creates a
severe crisis. The adulterous mate has brought much pain and suffering upon the innocent one,
who has the Scriptural right to divorce the guilty party and remarry. But must there be a divorce?
Is that the only recourse?

8
 We must bear in mind that although Jehovah God has provided a just ground for divorce, the
Bible also says of him: “He has hated a divorcing.” (Malachi 2:16) Rather than quickly jumping to
the conclusion that divorce is the only solution, one might consider the possibility of extending
mercy and forgiveness. Why?
A divorce will not necessarily remove the hurt and bitterness, but mercy and forgiveness will,
especially when the offender truly regrets the wrongdoing. Love shown at such a critical time may
actually strengthen the marriage. Viewing the matter in this light will help the innocent mate to
evaluate what may be the best course to follow, remembering Jesus’ words: “Happy are the
merciful, since they will be shown mercy.”—Matthew 5:7; compare Hosea 3:1-5.
Also to be weighed in the balance are the problems that may result in connection with children
in a single-parent home. The loneliness of a divorced person, too, merits consideration. For a
woman, the problems are compounded by the fact that in most parts of the world today, women
are still disadvantaged economically. After being a homemaker for a number of years, it is hard
for a single mother to get back into the job market and compete with others.
Some women feel that while they are married, they should prepare themselves for the
possibility of divorce. They may enroll in special schools or keep up their careers in order to
maintain their financial independence. Whether an individual should pursue such a course or not
is a personal decision. However, instead of spending time and energy preparing for a possibility,
would it not be a wiser investment to put time and energy into building a happy and lasting
marriage? By working hard at developing the fruitage of God’s spirit and maintaining a healthy
spiritual outlook, the Christian woman is likely to enjoy the love and praise of her husband. She
can also have confidence in God’s promise that he cares for the needs of those who seek first the
Kingdom.—Matthew 6:33; Proverbs 31:28-30; Galatians 5:22, 23.
The Ultimate Solution
As long as we live in this imperfect system of things, we can expect that there will be marital
problems. However, by following the Bible’s wise counsel, these can be minimized or dealt with
effectively. Furthermore, men and women who are willing to live by Jehovah’s standards in
marriage and in other areas of life are blessed with the prospect of entering a new system in
which “righteousness is to dwell.”—2 Peter 3:13.
In that system, mankind will become free of the ravages and all the sad consequences of sin
and imperfection. As long as the marriage arrangement continues here on earth, ‘what was the
case from the beginning’ will be the standard. Indeed, what God has yoked together, no man will
put apart.
[Picture on page 5]
What did Jesus say about divorce?
[Picture on page 7]
In the new world, there will be no marital problems that lead to divorce

When a Mate Is Unfaithful

THE shock was devastating. The couple had one small baby, and the young wife was
expecting a second. Now she found out that her husband had betrayed her. He had committed
adultery! Bitterly hurt and confused, she wondered what to do.
Unhappily, this is not an uncommon problem. Reports from different countries show that many
married people today are unfaithful to their mates and cause severe crises in their marriage. How
should a Christian react who finds that his or her marriage mate has been unfaithful?

9
 In such a situation, Jesus’ words on the subject have to be taken into account: “I say to you
that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits
adultery.” (Matthew 19:9) What does this mean? That fornication (which in the Bible sense
includes adultery and gross sexual immorality such as homosexuality) can break up a marriage.
Scripturally, the innocent partner has the right to divorce the guilty one and remarry without sin in
God’s eyes.
But must the innocent mate follow this course of action?
God’s Own Example
An example from the days of ancient Israel helps us to answer this. A prophet of God named
Hosea married a woman named Gomer and had a son by her. Afterward, Gomer was unfaithful
and had two children by other men. Then she evidently abandoned Hosea for her lovers.
Nevertheless, Hosea showed great compassion. He later took Gomer back, even though he had
to pay money for her. (She evidently had been abandoned by her lovers and had fallen into
poverty and slavery.) So rather than act in strict justice toward his wife, Hosea showed mercy.
This mercy of Hosea was used in the Bible as an illustration of an even greater act of mercy
toward an erring wife. Jehovah God compared his own relationship with Israel to that of a
husband to a wife. “I myself had husbandly ownership of them,” he said on one occasion.
(Jeremiah 31:32) But, like Hosea’s wife, the Israelites were unfaithful. They frequently worshiped
false gods, thus committing spiritual adultery. (Hosea 6:10; 7:4) By his own law, God could have
“divorced” them, cast them off. What did he do?
Like Hosea, he showed himself willing to take back his erring “wife” if she would abandon her
immorality. He looked forward to the time when “the sons of Israel will come back and certainly
look for Jehovah their God, and for David their king; and they will certainly come quivering to
Jehovah and to his goodness in the final part of the days.”—Hosea 3:5.
Can a Christian ever show a similar loving forgiveness to an erring mate?
Why Be Merciful?
Yes, and, in fact, many have. Married persons who commit adultery put their future into the
hands of their innocent mates. But often these victims have found it in their hearts to be forgiving.
Why did they do that?
For one thing, they remembered that marriage is a gift from God and should not be dissolved
lightly. They have also reflected on the great mercy God has shown to all of us and remembered
how it pleases him when we are merciful to each other. Jesus said: “Happy are the merciful, since
they will be shown mercy.”—Matthew 5:7.
Mercy is possible, especially when the offender has a deep feeling of guilt and sincerely
regrets the wrong done. In such a case, the innocent mate may feel it is worthwhile to fight
against the bitterness and hurt and lovingly help the sinner to change. Such forgiveness from a
loving mate can help the repentant sinner to realize as never before what a treasure his marriage
is and make him determined never to put it at risk again.
Remember, too, that sometimes—but by no means always—adultery is a result of an unhappy
situation at home. Would that excuse adultery? By no means! Yet realizing that such a situation
has existed may help the innocent mate to see what can be done to help the erring partner not to
stray again.
For example, a husband may spend long hours at work or in some other worthy pursuit. He
personally may feel completely happy and fulfilled, but what about the wife that he leaves at
home deprived of his company?
Or consider the case of the husband who used to come home tired from work to find the
house empty, no food prepared and a pile of dirty clothes on the floor. The wife was busy at
projects outside the house that were doubtless noble and important, yet the result was that this
husband felt neglected and unwanted. Hence, he turned his attention to another woman. When

10
the affair came to light, he begged for forgiveness and promised not to repeat his sin. However,
the wife planned to go ahead and divorce him, which, of course, she had the right to do, for her
husband had sinned grievously. But could the wife say that she was completely innocent of blame
in the bad marital situation that led to the immorality?
Thus, for one reason or another, a Christian may choose to imitate God himself and forgive an
erring mate. If so, great blessings can result. What blessings?
Blessings for the Merciful
First, many who have forgiven their unfaithful, repentant mate have been able to pull the
marriage back into a fine condition. Husband, wife and children have been able to enjoy a happy
homelife again. Surely, this is a goal worth working for.
Often the one forgiven appreciates his innocent and merciful partner much more. He may
recognize qualities of humility and love that perhaps he never realized existed, especially when
he comes to see what a terrible experience he has put his partner through.
This is what happened with the family mentioned at the beginning of this article. Of course, the
young wife was deeply hurt to find that her husband had been unfaithful. She had a Scriptural
right to send him away and end the marriage. However, this would have led to a fatherless family
and the loneliness of a divorced woman.
Instead, she showed consideration for her little child and the new baby that was coming. She
also considered the deep sorrow of her husband and remembered the love they once had.
Hence, she chose to imitate Jehovah God and forgive her repentant husband. The husband was
deeply impressed. With loving help from his wife he has regained his balance and the respect of
his family and associates. The problem is now in the past. This happy family is united and
working toward a future together.
A Prayerful Decision
In no way can transgressions against God’s law be minimized. Those unfaithful to their
marriage mate stand guilty before Jehovah God, the Originator of human marriage. If they lose
their family, they have to recognize that this is a direct result of their own sin. If they wish to
rebuild their relationship with God and look forward with confidence to the promises he holds out
to us, they have to repent and completely change their thinking and their immoral way of life—
whether their mate forgives them or not.
However, a breakup should not be viewed as automatic. Just as Hosea forgave Gomer, and
Jehovah time and again forgave the spiritually adulterous Israelites, innocent mates should at
least consider, and consider prayerfully, the possibility of preserving the marriage bond. This can
be a way to show respect for the Originator of marriage, as well as perhaps opening the way for
the couple to enjoy happiness in their marriage once again.
[Footnotes]
See The Watchtower of March 15, 1983, pages 29, 30.

Questions From Readers

11
▪ If a faithful Christian wife has been divorced by her husband, though neither of them is
guilty of adultery, would it be Scripturally proper for her to share the marital bed with him
when he visits the family?
God’s Word clearly indicates that sex relations are proper between a husband and a wife, not
between unmarried persons. Hence, a divorced couple should not have sex relations with each
other, for that would amount to fornication, but not freeing them for remarriage.
Christians, understandably, are concerned primarily about God’s views and directions. His
Word specifically advises: “Let marriage be honorable among all, and the marriage bed be
without defilement, for God will judge fornicators and adulterers.” (Hebrews 13:4) Let us consider
what bearing that has on the situation raised in the question.
In many parts of the earth it is common for a man and a woman to engage in sexual relations
without being married. Some claim that this is both morally fitting and acceptable to God as long
as the two are in “love” or have made a commitment to each other. That, however, is not the
Christian view. Appreciating that “God will judge fornicators and adulterers,” Christians want to
avoid both adultery and fornication.
When a man and a woman get married they establish before all that they are united as
husband and wife. In the sight of the law, society and God, they have a right to share in the
privileges of marriage, including marital relations. The Scriptures, in fact, urge mates not to
withhold from each other the sexual due: “The husband should satisfy his wife sexually. In the
same way, the wife should satisfy her husband’s sexual needs.”—1 Corinthians 7:3, Simple
English Bible.
What, though, if a couple gets a mere separation, which is legally possible in some lands?
Since they are still husband and wife legally and Scripturally, they must not share in marital
relations with anyone else, for to do so would be adultery that would ‘defile their marital bed.’ But
a separated couple have the option of making up again and of living together as the married
couple that they are, after legally canceling their separation.—1 Corinthians 7:10, 11.
Consider next the situation of when one mate, for example the husband, takes matters farther
than a separation and gets a divorce. A faithful Christian wife who later learned that (before or
after divorcing her) he had been morally unfaithful could remarry, considering her former marriage
ended both legally and in the eyes of Jehovah God. On the other hand, if there was a legal
divorce but no adultery, the divorce would not of itself end the marriage in God’s view, for the
Bible shows that immorality by one’s mate is the only valid basis for a divorce.—Matthew 19:6, 9.
That is the situation with the case in question, for it is definitely stated that no immorality has
occurred. The husband left his wife and got an unscriptural divorce. As a consequence of that
divorce they are no longer man and wife in the full sense, for he terminated the marriage legally.
So what if he visited his family and wanted to satisfy his or her sexual needs? For them to have
sex relations would, legally and in the view of the community, be essentially the same as two
unmarried persons having sexual relations; it would be tantamount to fornication.
In that situation no third party is involved, as would be needed to give Scriptural substance to
the legal divorce; so in God’s sight neither the man nor the woman would be free to marry other
individuals. (1 Corinthians 6:16-18) Yet their having sex relations with each other certainly would
be in disregard of God’s advice; to a degree they would be defiling the marriage bed since their
legal marriage ended with the divorce. This conduct would bring reproach on them and on the
Christian congregation of which the wife was a part. So, for her to remain in the congregation, she
should avoid sex relations unless the marriage is made legal again. She should hold to the
Scriptural and morally upright stand that sex relations should be limited only to legal marriage
mates. She thus would add to the dignity that the Bible shows marriage deserves.

12
 The God of Love Hates a Divorcing

“You people must guard yourselves respecting your spirit, and with the wife of your
youth may no one deal treacherously. For he [Jehovah] has hated a divorcing.”—
Mal. 2:15, 16.

A MAN who for many years had served as an elder in a Christian congregation began
experiencing problems in his marriage. He committed adultery with a worldly woman, thinking that
his wife would then divorce him and he would be free to marry a fellow believer. To his surprise,
his wife was willing to forgive him and be reconciled. But, determined to be free, he obtained a
legal divorce and then married another woman when the divorce became final. Upon doing so,
however, he was disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation.
2
How we wish that it could be reported that such a shocking course of action was a unique
one among those who claim to be dedicated to Jehovah! But, sad to say, such is not the case. In
fact, more and more it seems that some opt for selfish pleasure or the easy way out of an
unhappy marital situation instead of sticking to Bible principles and looking to Jehovah God in
prayer, consulting his Word and seeking help from the overseers in the congregation. It is hoped
that what is here presented will cause all dedicated Christians to fortify their minds in this matter
and will cause any who are considering taking such a selfish course to reconsider matters.
3
Much as this trend is to be regretted and deplored, it actually should not surprise us in view
of all that we see in the world today. There is no question about the fact that more couples are
getting divorces. In lands such as the United States and Russia, one marriage in three ends in a
divorce, and in some countries the ratio is almost one out of every two. Some states have “no-
fault” divorce, which doubtless plays its part in increasing divorces. Indeed, the number of
divorces would be far greater were it not for the fact that more and more men and women live
together without the benefit of marriage. For instance, reports reveal that in Brazil alone more
than four million couples are living that way.
HOW JEHOVAH VIEWS DIVORCING
4
How does Jehovah God view divorcing? Does he wink at it the way so many clergymen of
Christendom do? Far from it! We read at Malachi 2:15, 16: “‘You people must guard yourselves
respecting your spirit, and with the wife of your youth may no one deal treacherously. For he has
hated a divorcing,’ Jehovah the God of Israel has said; . . . ‘And you must guard yourselves
respecting your spirit, and you must not deal treacherously.’” Jesus Christ expressed a similar
view. When the religious leaders of his day asked him about the lawfulness of divorce, Jesus
replied: “Did you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and
female and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his
wife, and the two will be one flesh’? So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what
God has yoked together let no man put apart.”—Matt. 19:4-6.
5
Upon receiving this answer, those Pharisees asked: “Why, then, did Moses prescribe giving
a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her?” Jesus replied: “Moses, out of regard for your
hardheartedness, made the concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such has not been the
case from the beginning. I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of
fornication, and marries another commits adultery.” (Matt. 19:7-9) What do these scriptures tell
us? That neither Jehovah God nor his Son Jesus Christ takes lightly the violation of God’s laws
on marriage and divorce. Divorce tears apart what Jehovah God has joined together. He views
marriage as a lifetime bond.
6
That is why the seventh of the Ten Commandments stated: “You must not commit adultery.”
(Ex. 20:14) More than that, the law of Moses required the Israelites to stone to death any man
that committed adultery with another man’s wife, as well as the adulteress. (Lev. 20:10) Most
fittingly, at Hebrews 13:4 the apostle Paul warns that Jehovah God will judge adulterers and
fornicators.

13
 7
Strictly speaking, adultery is far more serious than fornication, which English lexicographers
define as sex relations between persons not married. But adultery has the added factor of
violating, or breaking, or adulterating, the marital bond. Thus the German word for adultery is
ehebruch, which, literally translated, means a breaking of the marital tie.
WHY DOES JEHOVAH HATE A DIVORCING?
8
Jehovah God hates a divorcing on unscriptural grounds because, first of all, it is sinning
against him. He has a vested interest in the institution of marriage and so any who go contrary to
his will in regard to it are actually sinning against God. That adultery is sinning against God can
be seen from what Joseph told Potiphar’s wife when she tried to seduce him to become party to
adultery: “How could I commit this great badness and actually sin against God?” (Gen. 39:9) And
what did King David say to Jehovah in expressing repentance for his sin of adultery with Uriah’s
wife? “Against you, you alone, I have sinned, and what is bad in your eyes I have done.”—Ps.
51:4.
9
Another reason why Jehovah God hates divorcing is that he is interested in justice, in fair
play. For example, at James 5:1-6 his Word strongly condemns those rich men who oppress their
employees. Divorcing (not based on Scriptural grounds) almost invariably means dealing
treacherously with one’s mate, even as God stated by his prophet Malachi. It works an injury on
the innocent mate. Just as in the Mosaic law Jehovah God repeatedly stated that he espoused
the cause of the oppressed fatherless and widows, and would punish those who took advantage
of these, so Jehovah God will judge adversely those who take advantage of legal loopholes to get
rid of their mates so that they can marry others.—Deut. 10:17, 18; 27:19.
10
Actually, the adulterer might be said to become a hedonist. A hedonist? Yes, a hedonist is
one who lives primarily for pleasure and selfish gratification. One who smokes tobacco, although
knowing full well how harmful it is, can be said to be a hedonist. (Luke 8:14; Titus 3:3, Kingdom
Interlinear Translation) Thus those who put the pleasures that a divorce and remarriage to
another can bring ahead of their obligation to be pleasing to Jehovah God can be said to be
hedonists. They truly are lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God.—2 Tim. 3:1, 2, 4.
11
In addition to sinning against Jehovah God and against one’s mate, the divorcing adulterer
also sins against the congregation with which he is associated, for his course besmirches its good
name. He also sins against the individuals in the congregation by his bad example. Thus in one
New York City congregation a rather prominent woman took this wrongful course and shortly
thereafter two other younger women were emboldened to follow her example. With good reason
the apostle Paul warns against stumbling others.—Phil. 1:9, 10.
12
The Bible makes clear how Jehovah God and Jesus Christ feel about divorcing. They hate
it! But how do you feel about it? What is your view of the sacred institution of marriage? Do you
have God’s view of it, or have you allowed yourself to be influenced, as the world in general has,
by that malicious marriage wrecker, Satan the Devil? Do you tend to condone the behavior of
those who have violated God’s laws regarding marriage, adultery and divorce? Are you among
those who, by flirting with persons of the opposite sex, are toying with sexual immorality? (Matt.
5:28; 15:19) Are you guarding your heart in these matters, or are you prone to indulge in
pleasurable illicit fantasies?—Prov. 4:23.
13
Divorcing and adultery nearly always go hand in hand. Especially where a legal divorce is
obtained without adultery on the part of either mate, the temptation is strong for the innocent one
to become “a subject for adultery.” (Matt. 5:32) And there is no doubt that adultery by either mate
would not leave that one with a clean conscience before Jehovah God. How can it when it is
spawned in deceit, even as we read: “As for the eye of the adulterer, it has watched for evening
darkness, saying, ‘No eye will behold me!’ And over his face he puts a covering.” (Job 24:15)
How deceitful adultery makes one can be seen from the experience given at the beginning of this
article.
14
Helping us to view adulterous divorcing in the right light are the words of David at Psalm
36:1-4: “The utterance of transgression to the wicked one is in the midst of his heart; there is no
dread of God in front of his eyes. For he has acted too smoothly to himself in his own eyes to find

14
out his error so as to hate it. The words of his mouth are hurtfulness and deception; he has
ceased to have insight for doing good. Hurtfulness is what he keeps scheming upon his bed. He
stations himself on a way that is not good. What is bad he does not reject.” How well that
description fits the adulterous divorcer!
15
Time and again those who have committed adultery have divorced their mates and, having
remarried, have been disfellowshiped, only to be reinstated after a year or so. Evidently the
elders handling such cases based their decision on what God’s Word has to say about showing
mercy. True, Jehovah God is merciful and so must elders be. However, to any man and woman
who have cunningly planned such actions in order to marry each other it can only be said that
even though the elders reinstated them that is by no means the end of the matter. Elders can
base their decision only on the apparent repentance, but they are unable to read the heart fully.
Not being able to judge the motive, they may reinstate the now married couple. But let that couple
never forget Paul’s words that “God will judge fornicators and adulterers.” (Heb. 13:4) The final
judgment in all such cases rests in the hands of Jehovah God, who knows all the circumstances.
He does read hearts, even as Jeremiah 17:9, 10 states. He knows the motive and is aware of any
deceit or malicious scheming on the part of persons who violate his law on marriage. Yes, “all
things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of him with whom we have an accounting.”
Surely such scriptures should make us pause and think.—Heb. 4:13.
16
However, in this regard it must be observed that God’s law does not require an innocent
mate to obtain a divorce. Circumstances may make it a fine thing for the innocent one to forgive
the guilty one, especially if that one is humbly and sincerely repentant. True, unfaithfulness on the
part of one’s mate might be quite a humiliating experience—that one’s mate has looked
elsewhere for pleasure and satisfaction. But many a loving wife and mother has put up with a
selfish or even an unfaithful husband for the sake of her children.
REASONS AND REMEDIES
17
Why do some fail in the test of keeping integrity by remaining faithful to their marriage
covenant? No doubt there are a number of reasons. Could one reason be that Christian
witnesses of Jehovah have no fear of eternal torment, knowing that there is no such place as a
burning hell? A Lutheran pastor once told a young Witness that if he did not believe in a burning
hell he would commit all sorts of badness. No doubt many in Christendom feel the same way
about it. As genuine Christians, we have freedom from the fear of eternal torment, but we do not
want to “use this freedom as an inducement for the flesh,” do we?—Gal. 5:13.
18
Today the world has gone sex mad. Promiscuity is the order of the day. There is no doubt
about there being an increasing of lawlessness. (Matt. 24:12) A Christian is thrown in the way of
temptation at his or her place of employment, being surrounded by persons who are not governed
by Bible principles and who may appear physically attractive. So one must continually be on
guard, exercising self-control and keeping contacts with those of the opposite sex, other than
one’s marriage mate, on a businesslike basis. Also to be guarded against is the media—
newspapers, magazines, television and motion pictures. Do not, by means of TV, in effect invite
into your home fornicators, adulterers and suchlike individuals. Nor should we overlook the fact
that overindulgence in rich food and liquor may cause a Christian, and especially a brother, to
become more easily aroused. Practice self-control in all aspects of life! “Hate what is bad.” “Abhor
what is wicked.”—Ps. 97:10; Rom. 12:9.
19
Then again, it may well be that some marriage mates did not use the best judgment in
choosing each other. They may find that they are not as compatible as they would like to be, or
they may be disappointed in the more intimate aspects of marriage. In that case, it is a matter of
making the best of the situation, thus honoring and vindicating Jehovah’s arrangement. The Bible
speaks approvingly of the one ‘who has sworn to what is bad for himself and yet does not
change.’ (Ps. 15:4) Simply stated, it is a matter of taking the bitter with the sweet. This calls to
mind an elder who was widely known and very well liked by many of his brothers and sisters. He
had married before he became a Witness and his unbelieving wife did all she could to make life
miserable for him. Once asked about it, he replied, “She made a man out of me.” To keep putting

15
up with her, he had to learn to be long-suffering and exercise great self-control. And he had the
satisfaction of knowing that he was heeding the apostle Paul’s advice.—1 Cor. 7:12-16.
20
However, it does appear that at times a divorce on the ground of adultery could have been
avoided had the “innocent” mate shown more empathy, wisdom, affection, understanding. A wife
may gradually give less and less thought to pleasing her husband physically, mentally,
emotionally, aesthetically and spiritually, thus causing him to look elsewhere for satisfaction in
one or more of these areas. Thus reluctance on the part of his wife to give him the marital due
caused one full-time minister to turn to her sister for gratification. Of course, regardless of how a
wife may have failed in this respect, there is absolutely no justification for adultery on the part of
the husband.
21
Truly it is with good reason that the God of love hates a divorcing. Treacherous divorcing is
sinning against God, against one’s mate, against the Christian congregation with which one is
associated and against the individuals within it, as this action may well cause some to be
stumbled. But how fine it is that Jehovah’s Witnesses in general are not persons inclined toward
divorcing! They are known as a people who earnestly strive to apply God’s counsel regarding
marriage. This makes them happier persons. And their strong, happy marriages are often noticed
by others, drawing some to the truth.
[Footnotes]
David also sinned against Uriah, but his sin against God was so great that his sin against Uriah
seemed negligible by comparison.
[Study Questions]
1, 2. (a) What reprehensible course was recently taken by one who had been an elder? (b) What
follows is presented to counteract what trend?
3. As to divorce, what is the attitude of the world in general?
4, 5. (a) How does Jehovah God regard treacherous divorcing? (b) How did Jesus express
himself on the subject of divorce?
6. What did the law of Moses have to say about adultery?
7. Why is adultery more reprehensible than fornication?
8, 9. (a) What is one reason why God hates treacherous divorcing? (b) What is another reason
for his doing so?
10. Why can an adulterer be said to be a hedonist?
11. Besides sinning against God and one’s mate, against whom does the adulterous divorcer sin?
12. What soul-searching questions should each married Christian ask himself?
13. What shows that deceit and adultery nearly always go hand in hand?
14. How do the words at Psalm 36:1-4 well fit the adulterous divorcer?
15. Those who adulterously divorce and remarry should seriously consider what Scriptural
principles?
16. Why might an innocent mate choose not to divorce the guilty one?
17. What may well be one reason why some have presumed adulterously to divorce and
remarry?
18. What conditions make it necessary to be on guard continually in the matter of one’s thoughts
and actions in regard to sex?
19. How should matters be viewed by those whose marriage leaves something to be desired?

16
20. What are some circumstances that might contribute toward one’s adulterously divorcing one’s
mate?
21. (a) Why is it wrong to divorce one’s mate treacherously? (b) But, as to treacherous divorcing,
what can be said about Jehovah’s Witnesses in general?
[Picture on page 20]
Unscriptural Divorce is sin against others
Jehovah
Mate
Individuals
Congregation

Maintaining Marriage in Honor Before God and Men

“Recommending ourselves to every human conscience in the sight of God.”—2 Cor.

4:2.

FOR God’s congregated people to stay within his favor, it is vital that marriage be held in
honor among them. (Heb. 13:4) Each individual married Christian should show serious concern
that his or her marriage is honorable in the sight of both God and men. In this connection the
question arises, To what extent do human authorities, including political governments and civil
authorities, enter the picture? Does the validity of a marriage depend entirely upon its recognition
by civil authorities and does their validation determine how Jehovah God, the Author of marriage,
views the union?
2
In the preceding article we have seen that marriage among people of Hebrew Scripture times
was at first a family or tribal affair. When the nation of Israel was formed, God gave them his law,
which contained numerous provisions concerning marriage, including prohibitions of incestuous
relationships, regulations governing marital duties and similar provisions. (Leviticus, chaps. 18
and 20) There was, however, no requirement that a document or license be obtained from the
priesthood in order for a couple to marry, nor that a priestly representative be present at the
marriage to validate it. Nor was such the case as regards representatives of the Israelite
government. Rather, as long as God’s law was adhered to, the marriage was accepted as valid
and honorable within the particular community where the wedded ones lived.
3
In course of time, the nation of Israel came under the domination of foreign powers—
Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. To what extent did this affect the marriage
arrangements among the Israelites? From what information history provides, it appears that they
continued much as before, this being permitted by the nations dominating them. Though a subject
people, it appears that questions or even disputes, such as those involving divorce actions, were
handled chiefly by the Jewish elders and their judicial courts. Obviously, however, if an Israelite
took a marriage case to the courts of the dominant nation he could expect them to judge the case
on the basis of their own laws relative to marriage.
4
It is thought that in later Bible times marriages came to be registered, though there seems to
be no clear evidence of this. At any rate, it appears that any registering of the marriage came into
the picture only after the marriage had been effected. The civil government thus acted as a
record-keeper of the fact of the marriage rather than as a judge of the morality of the marriage.
5
What was the situation in the early centuries of the Christian congregation? As in Israel, it
seems to have continued largely as a family affair. And, as back in Eden and as among the

17
Israelites (and, in fact, most peoples of that time), there was no requirement that some religious
or civil authority license the marriage or be present to make it a valid and honorable one. Civil
authorities do not seem to have concerned themselves with marriage or marital relationships until
such time as one or both of the parties might come to them for legal solution of problems or
disputes. They would at such time either acknowledge or deny the validity of the marriage,
depending upon its conformity to their laws. (Roman law, for example, did not recognize
marriages between brothers and sisters.)
6
Conformity to God’s law, nevertheless, was necessary if the marriage was to be viewed as
honorable within the Christian congregation. Thus, when the apostle Paul heard from the
Corinthian congregation that “a wife a certain man has of his father,” he did not hesitate to
condemn this as “fornication.” He also showed that the congregation was to be concerned about
the standards of the community where they lived, for he pointed out that “even among the
nations” such a thing was not being done.—1 Cor. 5:1, 2.
7
The Christian congregation viewed itself as an ‘association of brothers’ made up of fellow
members of “God’s household,” the term “household” here having the sense of a family
household, as a comparison of such texts as Matthew 10:12, 35, 36; Acts 16:30-34; 1 Timothy
3:4, 5; 5:4, 8 indicates. So, like a family the congregation would rightly take an interest in
marriages contracted by its members.
8
Commenting on the viewpoint of early Christians, Hastings’ Encyclopædia of Religion and
Ethics (Vol. VIII, page 435) states: “Marriage is, in the first place, an affair of the family. In the
earliest period the Christian congregation regarded itself as a spiritual family, and the life and
concerns of every member of the congregation were of intimate interest to the whole body. . . .
The testimony of the [church] Fathers, from the middle of the 3rd century onwards, shows that
what we should now describe as civil marriages were not unknown, perhaps were not
uncommon, but at the same time were strongly discountenanced by the Church.”
9
Thus, what evidence is available in the Scriptures and in history indicates that in early times
civil marriage or civil validation of marriage did not play a very prominent part. It does not seem to
have been a great issue as regards the honorableness of a marriage from the Christian point of
view. Apparently the honorableness of a marriage depended most directly upon its acceptance by
the Christian congregation as conforming to divine standards, with consideration also being given
to attitudes and standards of people in the community where the Christians lived. Like the apostle
Paul, Christians would seek to be “recommending [themselves] to every human conscience in the
sight of God,” and try to “keep from becoming causes for stumbling to Jews as well as Greeks
and to the congregation of God” by ‘doing all things for God’s glory.’—2 Cor. 4:2; 1 Cor. 10:31,
32.
10
However, it is a fact that, in more recent times and in many parts of the earth, the
relationship of the civil authorities to marriage and its validation has taken on greater prominence.
Rightly, Christians must take this fact into account in seeking to keep their marriages “honorable
among all.” (Heb. 13:4) In weighing the matter, it is of value to consider how this changed attitude
has come about. The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics says (page 437; italics ours): “From
the civil side marriage is regarded as a legal contract which must be regulated for practical
purposes by the State. From the Christian point of view, marriage is a holy estate which the
Church may claim to regulate in the highest interests of religion and morality. Experience shows
that there must ever be a possibility of conflict between the two jurisdictions, and that,
consequently, difficulties in practice may often result. . . . It is in the modern period, since the
[Protestant] Reformation, that the question of the two jurisdictions and the proper relations of the
one to the other has come into prominence. . . . ”
11
It therefore appears that the validation of marriage by civil authorities has become more of
an issue in modern times than was true at any past time in history. At least in strongly Protestant
lands the trend has been more and more to view the validity of marriage (and consequently of
divorce) as resting almost entirely with the decision of civil authorities. The role of the
congregation with regard to the validity of marriage (and divorce) has consequently waned in the
eyes of many.

18
 DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE
12
Faced with such circumstances, what should the Christian do? He certainly cannot ignore
the existing state of affairs if he desires his marriage to be honorable “among all.” He cannot ‘turn
back the clock’ to the days when civil authorities were not viewed as an important factor in the
validation of marriage. However, these questions arise: Is the decision of civil authorities to be
viewed as absolute in determining whether a marriage is valid—either at its beginning or when it
perhaps ends through divorce? To what extent is God affected by their decision?
13
In effect, do the civil authorities have the final word as to whether God accepts or rejects the
validity of a marriage (or of a divorce)? We can see that if this were so there could be
considerable inconsistency as to what is required to gain God’s blessing in marriage. Why?
Because the views of civil authorities differ widely from place to place, often being at complete
odds with one another and, more importantly, at times being in contradiction of the standards
contained in the Bible.
14
In some lands, for example, polygamy is legally approved and each wife of a polygamist is
viewed as legal and as having the same standing as any other of his wives. Christ Jesus and the
inspired apostle Paul, however, showed that God’s standard is for a man to have only one wife.—
Matt. 19:4, 5; 1 Cor. 7:2; 1 Tim. 3:2.
15
Also, some countries allow a person to divorce his mate on any number of grounds, at times
for the slightest of reasons. Others, by contrast, do not recognize a person’s right to divorce his or
her mate even on grounds of sexual infidelity and thus be free to remarry. The Bible, on the other
hand, says that there is only one valid ground for divorce, namely, fornication, and it shows that
those divorcing for such reason do become free to remarry. (Matt. 5:32; 19:3-9) Thus in some
cases what the State approves, God disapproves, and in others what the State disallows, God
allows.
16
The evidence, then, points to the fact that the civil state’s position in determining the validity
of marriage (or divorce) is only relative, while that of God is absolute. To obtain a balanced view
of the relative authority of the State (designated as “Caesar” in the Bible) in this matter, it is of
benefit to consider just what interest civil governments have in the field of marriage, what they are
particularly concerned with, and in what way the Christian can come under obligation toward
them in this field.
CAESAR’S INTEREST IN MARRIAGE
17
Are civil governments chiefly concerned with moral and religious issues regarding marriage
or is their concern related principally to another aspect? We may recall that the earlier-quoted
encyclopedia stated that, from the civil side, “marriage is regarded as a legal contract which must
be regulated for practical purposes by the State.” This is borne out by the history of governmental
legislation relative to marriage and divorce. That history shows that the concern of civil
governments has been motivated by their involvement in such matters as inheritance and
property rights, particularly when a dissolution of the marriage “contract” (by divorce or death)
brings these rights into question. Confirming this as true today, the Encyclopædia Britannica
(Macropædia, 1976, Vol. 7, pages 166, 167) says:
“The law . . . is concerned mainly with the rights and duties of husband and wife and
parent and child, particularly in questions of financial support.” “In most countries
today . . . the legal documentation of a marriage is mainly a registration of the event.
So basically, in the legal sense, a marriage is the implied creation of certain rights or
obligations such as maintenance, marital property and succession rights, and the
custody of legitimate minor children.”
18
“Caesar” (the political state) has therefore concerned himself with marriage primarily
because such legal issues have been brought to his courts for judicial settlement, not because of
concern over the religious or moral aspects of marriage. He has also shown concern over the
prevention of the spread of disease, particularly venereal disease, and of weakening genetic
effects (as among children born to close blood relatives), this again being for “practical purposes.”

19
That is why we find that even antireligious, atheistic governments have legal requirements for
granting recognition of a marriage as valid.
19
What, then, of Jesus’ instructions to ‘pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar’? In seeking to be
obedient to this command, is the Christian congregation called upon to take Caesar’s view of a
marriage union or a divorce as the final, decisive, binding factor as to its validity and morality?—
Matt. 22:21.
20
First, it should be noted that the issue provoking Jesus’ words was regarding taxation.
Caesar provides many services and deserves to be ‘paid back’ for these. (Matt. 22:17-21)
Caesar, however, is not the source of the right to marry. This actually comes from God, the
Originator of marriage. (Gen. 1:27, 28; 2:18, 22-24; 9:1; compare 1 Timothy 4:1-3.) Hence,
Caesar’s position in this field is not as the final arbiter as to what is morally right and wrong in
marriage (or divorce). What Caesar can provide is legal recognition and accompanying protection
of marital rights in his court systems. The Christian who wants his marriage to be “honorable
among all” rightly desires such provisions to protect the rights and interests of his family. To
obtain such recognition and rights he should properly ‘pay back to Caesar’ for these by complying
with Caesar’s regulations for receiving them. This may include such things as license fees, the
conforming to certain medical examinations, or similar requirements.
21
Such repayment to Caesar for the advantages his legal recognition provides does not mean,
however, that the Christian loses sight of the fact that Caesar’s authority in marriage is only
relative. God is not bound by Caesar’s decisions and may disapprove where Caesar approves, or
accept where Caesar rejects. The Christian should rightly give conscientious consideration to
Caesar’s marriage and divorce provisions but will always give greatest consideration to the
Supreme Authority, Jehovah God. (Acts 4:19; Rom. 13:1, 5) This will assure God’s approval and
blessing.
22
Thus the Christian appreciates that, even though Caesar’s rulings of themselves are not
what finally determines the validity of his marriage in God’s eyes, this does not thereby exempt
him from the Scriptural injunction: “Let marriage be honorable among all.” (Heb. 13:4) He is
obligated to do conscientiously whatever is within his power to see that his marriage is accorded
such honor by all. True, in some lands where a certain race or religion predominates, marriage to
anyone not of the predominant race or religion might never be viewed with popular approval.
Nevertheless, the Christian should seek whatever legal recognition is possible for him so as to
avoid exposing his marriage to adverse criticism or a lowering of it in the estimation of others.
(2 Cor. 6:3; 1 Pet. 2:12, 15, 16; 3:16) He wants his marriage to bring honor to the Author of
marriage.
23
Those who wish to become baptized members of the Christian congregation, and who do
not have legal recognition of their marital union, should properly be expected to do all that they
can to obtain such recognition and registration of their marriage. This will serve to remove any
possible doubts as to the honorableness of their union in the eyes of people generally. But is this
possible in all cases and, if not, what can be done about it?
WHERE CAESAR’S RECOGNITION IS UNAVAILABLE
24
Understanding the relative nature of Caesar’s authority regarding marriage is here helpful.
Take, for example, those areas where, either because of the dominance of some religion or for
other reasons, the law does not allow for any divorce, not even on the Scriptural grounds of
“fornication” (por·nei´a). A man whose wife proved unfaithful to him might have left her and
thereafter formed a union with another mate, by whom he may even have a family. He may then
learn the truth of God’s Word and, in obedience to that Word, desire to be baptized as a disciple
of God’s Son. Because the national law does not agree with God’s law regarding divorce and
remarriage, he cannot obtain a divorce and legalize his present union. What can he do?
25
If his circumstances permit, he might go to a neighboring land that does grant divorce and
obtain such there and then remarry under the laws of that land. This might serve to add some
honor to his union, although upon returning to his homeland the marriage might not be
recognized by the “Caesar” ruling there. If he cannot reasonably do this, he should get a legal

20
separation from his estranged, legal mate, or whatever the local law makes possible. Thereafter
he should make a written statement to the local congregation pledging faithfulness to his present
mate and declaring his agreement to obtain a legal marriage certificate if the estranged legal wife
should die or if other circumstances should make possible the obtaining of such registration. If his
present mate likewise seeks baptism, she would also make such a signed statement.
26
In one South American country, although the law provides for annulment of marriage in
cases of bigamy, applications for such annulment are often simply ignored by “Caesar.” Consider,
then, a man who, while already having a legal living wife, separates from her and marries another
woman and falsely obtains a legal certification, thereby becoming bigamous. If, upon learning
Bible truth, he seeks baptism, he may find that his efforts to straighten out the legal situation
regarding his current marriage are frustrated by the lack of interest on the part of the civil
authorities. If unable to do anything to elevate in honor his present union through Caesar’s courts
or authorities, how could he proceed? He could sign a similar declaration pledging faithfulness
and file this with the congregation. Then he could be accepted for baptism, as could his mate by
doing the same.
27
In a certain west African country, it may take up to ten years to obtain a divorce. Would a
person desirous of being baptized, but needing a divorce so as to establish legally his or her
present marital union, be obliged to postpone baptism for such a period of years? It does not
seem proper that the lack of Caesar’s legal recognition should block him from showing his faith in
the sin-atoning power of Christ’s sacrifice by taking the vital step of baptism and thus gaining the
privilege of an approved relationship with God. (Compare the apostle’s statement at Acts 11:17
as to humans’ inability to “hinder” God in his approving of persons.) Bible examples indicate that
unnecessary delay in taking the step of baptism is not advisable. (Acts 2:37-41; 8:34-38; 16:30-
34; 22:16) Having initiated the legal process of divorce, such person would then provide the
congregation with a statement pledging faithfulness, thereby establishing his determination to
maintain his current union in honor while he continues to follow through on his efforts to gain as
well the legal recognition that Caesar provides,
28
Persons may move to another country and while there they may learn the truth and wish to
be baptized. In order to obtain legal recognition of their existing marital relationship, they may
need first to obtain a divorce from a previous mate. It may be that the country to which they have
moved has provisions for divorce but such provisions may not be available to them as foreigners.
For example, many persons from other European countries have moved into Germany seeking
employment. While Germany has provisions for divorce, these provisions do not embrace most
noncitizens. In such cases, also, the individuals desiring to be baptized and seeking to establish
the honorableness and permanence of their existing marital relationship would sign a declaration
pledging faithfulness.
29
These same principles would apply for a baptized Christian who finds that “Caesar’s” laws
would not grant him legal recognition in his exercise of God-given rights regarding divorce and
remarriage. For example, in countries that do not recognize the God-given right to divorce an
adulterous mate and remarry, an individual whose mate proves unfaithful (and from whom he
therefore chooses to separate, not forgiving her) should submit the clear evidence of this infidelity
to the elders of the congregation. Then, if at some future time he (or she) were to decide to take
another mate, this could be done in an honorable way, the parties to the marriage signing
statements pledging faithfulness and the determination to gain legal recognition whenever such
should become feasible.
30
The signing of such a written statement pledging faithfulness is viewed by the congregation
as a putting of oneself on record before God and man that the signer will be just as faithful to his
or her existing marital relationship as he or she would be if the union were one validated by civil
authorities. Such declaration is viewed as no less binding than one made before a marriage
officer representing a “Caesar” government of the world. In reality, it is not the particular kind of
document made but the fact that the individual makes the declaration before God that gives it its
greatest weight and solemnity.

21
 31
How might such a declaration be worded? It could contain a statement such as the
following:
“I, ......., do here declare that I have accepted .......... as my mate in marital
relationship; that I have done all within my ability to obtain legal recognition of this
relationship by the proper public authorities and that it is because of having been
unable to do so that I therefore make this declaration pledging faithfulness in this
marital relationship. I recognize this relationship as a binding tie before Jehovah God
and before all persons, to be held to and honored in full accord with the principles of
God’s Word. I will continue to seek the means to obtain legal recognition of this
relationship by the civil authorities and if at any future time a change in
circumstances makes this possible I promise to legalize this union.
“Signed this .......... day of ........., 19..... Witnesses to my signing: .....................................”
32
As indicated above, this declaration should be signed by the one making the declaration and
also by two others as witnesses, and the date should be noted thereon. It is advisable for copies
of the statement pledging faithfulness to be kept by each of the persons involved and by the
congregation with which they are associated, and one copy should be sent to the Branch office of
the Watch Tower Society in that area. It would also be beneficial for an announcement to be
made to the congregation that such a declaration has been made so that all will be aware of the
conscientious steps that are being taken to uphold the honorableness of the marriage
relationship.
33
Where the person is unable to gain “Caesar’s” recognition but takes the proper steps to
establish his marriage with the congregation, he must realize that whatever consequences result
to him as far as the world outside is concerned are his sole responsibility and must be faced by
him. For example, if some legal issue, involving property or inheritance rights, arises due to an
earlier marriage union, the individual cannot claim “Caesar’s” judicial protection as regards his
new, unrecognized union.
KEEPING BASIC PRINCIPLES CLEAR
34
From country to country, marriage and divorce legislation presents a multitude of different
angles and aspects. Rather than becoming entangled in a confusion of technicalities, the
Christian, or the one desiring to become a disciple of God’s Son, can be guided by basic
Scriptural principles that hold true in all cases.
35
God’s view is of first concern. So, first of all the person must consider whether that one’s
present relationship, or the relationship into which he or she contemplates entering, is one that
could meet with God’s approval or whether, in itself, it violates the standards of God’s Word.
Take, for example, the situation where a man lives with a wife but also spends time living with
another woman as a concubine. As long as such a state of concubinage prevails, the relationship
of the second woman can never be harmonized with Christian principles, nor could any
declaration on the part of the woman or the man make it do so. The only right course is cessation
of the relationship. Similarly with an incestuous relationship with a member of one’s immediate
family, or a homosexual relationship or other such situation condemned by God’s Word. (Matt.
19:5, 6; 1 Tim. 3:2; 1 Cor. 5:1) It is not the lack of any legal validation that makes such
relationships unacceptable; they are in themselves unscriptural and, hence, immoral. Hence, a
person involved in such a situation could not make any kind of ‘declaration of faithfulness,’ since it
would have no merit in God’s eyes.
36
If the relationship is such that it can have God’s approval, then a second principle to
consider is that one should do all one can to establish the honorableness of one’s marital union in
the eyes of all. (Heb. 13:4) A person seeking baptism may be one who, in the past, separated
from a legal mate and, without having obtained a divorce, entered into a marital relationship with
another person. Considerable time may have passed, and perhaps children have resulted. So,
upon learning the truth the person cannot reasonably be expected to go back to his first mate and
thus try to refashion his life according to his previous circumstances. But now, in ‘desisting from

22
sins,’ he must determine that his life henceforth will be lived according to God’s will.—1 Pet. 4:1-
3; compare 1 Corinthians 7:17-24.
37
What then? If divorce is possible, then such step should now be taken so that, having
obtained the divorce (on whatever legal grounds may be available), the present union can receive
civil validation as a recognized marriage. These same things would be true of the person who,
before learning the truth, has become guilty of bigamy. He should take the necessary steps to
have the matter resolved legally (as by annulment and/or divorce) so that he or she may now be
recognized as the legal mate of only one person.
38
Finally, if the marital relationship is not one out of harmony with the principles of God’s
Word, and if one has done all that can reasonably be done to have it recognized by civil
authorities and has been blocked in doing so, then a declaration pledging faithfulness can be
signed. In some cases, as has been noted, the extreme slowness of official action may make the
accomplishing of legal steps a matter of many, many years of effort. Or it may be that the costs
represent a crushingly heavy burden that the individual would need years to be able to meet. In
such cases the declaration pledging faithfulness will provide the congregation with the basis for
viewing the existing marriage as honorable, while the individual continues conscientiously to work
out the legal aspects to the best of his ability. A fact worth noting is that in many communities,
and even in entire countries, the people themselves give little importance to the legal factors
involved in marriage and are far more affected by what they actually see as evidence of a faithful
marriage union. Nevertheless, even here the Christian should sincerely endeavor to take
whatever steps are available, or that open up for him, to establish the honorableness of his union
beyond question.
39
By keeping in mind the basic principles presented, the Christian should be able to approach
the matter in a balanced way, neither underestimating nor overestimating the validation offered by
the political state. He (or she) should always give primary concern to God’s view of the union.
Along with this, every effort should be made to set a fine example of faithfulness and devotion to
one’s mate, thus keeping the marriage “honorable among all.” Such course will bring God’s
blessing and result to the honor and praise of the Author of marriage, Jehovah God.—1 Cor.
10:31-33.
[Footnotes]
In Roman Law, the “sole necessary condition for marriage” was “the consent of the parties” with
no preliminary license, ceremony or other validation required. (The New Schaff-Herzog
Religious Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, pp. 198, 199) Thus, if a man proposed marriage to a woman
and she consented, this was all that was legally required to make a marriage effective.
As reference works show, the Roman Catholic Church eventually claimed for itself the exclusive
right to legislate regarding marriage, bringing forth its own regulations and restrictions and
holding that civil authorities must be bound by these. The Protestant Reformers swung very
much in the other direction and placed marriage almost entirely in the hands of the civil
authorities. In England, Scotland and Ireland the civil ceremony was introduced in 1653 to free
the Church from secular affairs. A French law of 1792 made the civil ceremony obligatory
upon all citizens on the principle that “the citizen belongs to the state, irrespective of religion.”
(The New Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, pp. 199, 200)
[Study Questions]
1. (a) As respects his marriage, what should be a Christian’s concern? (b) What questions might
arise as to the regulations of the civil authorities regarding marriage? (Mark 12:17)
2. What legal formalities regarding marriage did God’s law to Israel not require?
3. Did Israel’s coming under the domination of foreign powers affect the way in which marriage
and divorce were handled?
4. When registration of marriages was first introduced, what purpose did it serve?

23
5. (a) What was the situation about licensing marriages in the early centuries of the Christian
congregation? (b) When did the civil authorities begin to concern themselves with marriage
and marital relationships?
6. (a) What primarily governed marriage relationships in the Christian congregation? (b) Should
the views of the community in which Christians live ever have a bearing on what they do
about their marriages?
7, 8. (a) Why does the Christian congregation rightly take an interest in the marriages contracted
by its members? (b) What does history reveal in this regard about early Christians?
9. (a) What conclusion can we draw from the Scriptures and history about civil validation of
marriage? (b) Upon what did the honorableness of marriage depend?
10, 11. (a) How is it that the civil authorities eventually became involved with marriage and its
validation? (b) What view regarding the validity of marriage prevails in strongly Protestant
lands?
12. Since the civil authority has become involved with marriage and its validation, what questions
does this raise for the servant of God?
13. Why cannot the view of the civil authority regarding marriage be regarded as absolute? (Acts
5:29)
14. What is the Biblical view of polygamy despite any legal recognition that it may be given in
some lands?
15. How do man’s laws about divorce in some lands differ from God’s law?
16. How should the State’s authority in determining the validity of marriage be viewed? (Rom.
13:1; 1 Pet. 2:13, 14)
17, 18. When it comes to marriage, what has been the chief concern of the civil authorities, and
why?
19. In view of Jesus’ counsel to ‘pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar,’ what question might be
raised about marriage and divorce?
20. (a) What prompted Jesus’ statement about ‘paying back Caesar’s things to Caesar’? (b) To
what extent does this principle have a bearing on a Christian’s marriage?
21. How should Caesar’s authority in marriage affect a Christian, and why?
22, 23. Why should a Christian seek legal recognition for his marriage?
24. What problem might confront a man in a land that makes no allowance for divorce?
25. How might a man who is divorced in God’s eyes but who cannot get legal recognition for this
in his own land establish that he is not living in adultery?
26. What can a person do if lack of interest on the part of the civil authorities makes it impossible
for him to get legal recognition for his marriage?
27. Does baptism have to be postponed by one whose marital status could not be given any legal
recognition until the passing of up to ten years? Why, or why not?
28. When legal recognition for an existing marital relationship depends upon getting a divorce that
cannot be obtained in the country of one’s residence, does this mean that the couple would
have to separate if they desire to be baptized?
29. How might a Christian establish his Scriptural freedom to remarry in lands that make no
provision for divorce?
30. How should the congregation view a declaration of faithfulness in lands where a Scriptural
union, under certain circumstances, will not be given legal recognition?

24
31, 32. What are some basic points that a declaration of faithfulness might include, and what
should be done with it?
33. What responsibility must the individual bear personally in connection with a declaration of
faithfulness?
34. Regarding marriage and divorce, what is the final written authority for the Christian?
35. What is the Scriptural view of concubinage and incest?
36. What is required of a person who, before learning the truth, did not show proper regard for the
marriage arrangement?
37. What steps may a person have to take to get legal recognition for an existing marital
arrangement?
38. How can a person show that he desires an honorable marriage even though he is not in a
position to get legal recognition for a union that is acceptable in the sight of God?
39. What confidence may Christians have when they seek to keep marriage honorable?

JEREMIAH

(Jer·e·mi´ah) [possibly, Jehovah Exalts; or, Jehovah Loosens [likely from the womb]].
1. A Benjamite who joined David when he was at Ziklag. He was among David’s mighty men.
—1Ch 12:1-4.
2. One of the sons of Gad who gathered to David “at the place difficult to approach in the
wilderness” when David was a refugee from Saul. He was the fifth among these “valiant, mighty
men . . . whose faces were the faces of lions, and they were like the gazelles upon the mountains
for speed.” Of these Gadite heads of David’s army, it is said: “The least one was equal to a
hundred, and the greatest to a thousand.” They “crossed the Jordan in the first month when it was
overflowing all its banks, and they then chased away all those of the low plains, to the east and to
the west.”—1Ch 12:8-15.
3. The tenth one of the Gadite heads in David’s army, as described in No. 2.—1Ch 12:13, 14.
4. One of the heads of paternal houses in the section of the tribe of Manasseh E of the Jordan
in the days of the kings. The Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh E of the
Jordan (among them being this Jeremiah’s descendants) “began to act unfaithfully toward the
God of their forefathers and went having immoral intercourse with the gods of the peoples of the
land, whom God had annihilated from before them. Consequently the God of Israel stirred up the
spirit of Pul the king of Assyria even the spirit of Tilgath-pilneser the king of Assyria, so that [in the
days of Pekah, king of Israel] he took into exile those of the Reubenites and of the Gadites and of
the half tribe of Manasseh and brought them to Halah and Habor and Hara and the river
Gozan.”—1Ch 5:23-26; 2Ki 15:29.
5. A man of the town of Libnah, a priestly city. He was the father of King Josiah’s wife
Hamutal, who was the mother of Kings Jehoahaz and Zedekiah (Mattaniah).—2Ki 23:30, 31;
24:18; Jer 52:1; Jos 21:13; 1Ch 6:57.

25
 6. A prophet, the son of Hilkiah, a priest of Anathoth, a city of the priests located in Benjamin’s
territory less than 5 km (3 mi) NNE of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. (Jer 1:1; Jos 21:13,
17, 18) Jeremiah’s father, Hilkiah, was not the high priest of that name, who was of the line of
Eleazar. Jeremiah’s father was very likely of the line of Ithamar and possibly descended from
Abiathar, the priest whom King Solomon dismissed from priestly service.—1Ki 2:26, 27.
Commissioned as Prophet. Jeremiah was called to be a prophet when a young man, in
647 B.C.E., in the 13th year of the reign of King Josiah of Judah (659-629 B.C.E.). Jehovah told
him: “Before I was forming you in the belly I knew you, and before you proceeded to come forth
from the womb I sanctified you. Prophet to the nations I made you.” (Jer 1:2-5) He was therefore
one of the few men for whose birth Jehovah assumed responsibility—intervening by a miracle or
by a guiding providence—that they might be his special servants. Among these men are Isaac,
Samson, Samuel, John the Baptizer, and Jesus.—See FOREKNOWLEDGE,
FOREORDINATION.
When Jehovah spoke to him, Jeremiah showed diffidence. He replied to God: “Alas, O
Sovereign Lord Jehovah! Here I actually do not know how to speak, for I am but a boy.” (Jer 1:6)
From this remark of his, and comparing his boldness and firmness during his prophetic ministry, it
can be seen that such unusual strength was not a thing inherent in Jeremiah, but actually came
from full reliance on Jehovah. Truly Jehovah was with him “like a terrible mighty one,” and it was
Jehovah who made Jeremiah “a fortified city and an iron pillar and copper walls against all the
land.” (Jer 20:11; 1:18, 19) Jeremiah’s reputation for courage and boldness was such that some
during Jesus’ earthly ministry took him to be Jeremiah returned to life.—Mt 16:13, 14.
Writings. Jeremiah was a researcher and a historian as well as a prophet. He wrote the book
bearing his name and is also generally credited with writing the books of First and Second Kings,
covering the history of both kingdoms (Judah and Israel) from the point where the books of
Samuel left off (that is, in the latter part of David’s reign over all Israel) down to the end of both
kingdoms. His chronology of the period of the kings, using the method of comparison or collation
of the reigns of Israel’s and Judah’s kings, helps us to establish the dates of certain events with
accuracy. After the fall of Jerusalem, Jeremiah wrote the book of Lamentations.
Strong Denunciatory Message. Jeremiah was no chronic complainer. Rather, he showed
himself to be loving, considerate, and sympathetic. He exercised fine control and marvelous
endurance and was moved to great sadness by the conduct of his people and the judgments they
suffered.—Jer 8:21.
Actually, it was Jehovah who made the complaint against Judah, and justifiably so, and
Jeremiah was under obligation to declare it unremittingly, which he did. Also, it must be borne in
mind that Israel was God’s nation, bound to him by covenant and under his law, which they were
grossly violating. As basis and solid ground for Jeremiah’s denunciations, Jehovah repeatedly
pointed to the Law, calling attention to the responsibility of the princes and the people and
recounting wherein they had broken the Law. Time and again Jehovah called attention to the
things he, through his prophet Moses, had warned them would come upon them if they refused to
listen to his words and broke his covenant.—Le 26; De 28.
Courage, Endurance, Love. Jeremiah’s courage and endurance were matched by his love
for his people. He had scathing denunciations and fearful judgments to proclaim, especially to the
priests, prophets, and rulers and to those who took “the popular course” and had developed “an
enduring unfaithfulness.” (Jer 8:5, 6) Yet he appreciated that his commission was also “to build
and to plant.” (Jer 1:10) He wept over the calamity that was to come to Jerusalem. (Jer 8:21, 22;
9:1) The book of Lamentations is an evidence of his love and concern for Jehovah’s name and
people. In spite of cowardly, vacillating King Zedekiah’s treacherousness toward him, Jeremiah
pleaded with him to obey the voice of Jehovah and continue living. (Jer 38:4, 5, 19-23)
Furthermore, Jeremiah had no self-righteous attitude but included himself when acknowledging
the wickedness of the nation. (Jer 14:20, 21) After his release by Nebuzaradan, he hesitated to
leave those being taken into Babylonian exile, perhaps feeling that he should share their lot or
desiring to serve their spiritual interests further.—Jer 40:5.

26
 At times in his long career Jeremiah became discouraged and required Jehovah’s assurance,
but even in adversity he did not forsake calling on Jehovah for help.—Jer 20.
Associations. Through all of his more than 40 years of prophetic service, Jeremiah was not
abandoned. Jehovah was with him to deliver him from his enemies. (Jer 1:19) Jeremiah took
delight in Jehovah’s word. (Jer 15:16) He avoided association with those who had no
consideration for God. (Jer 15:17) He found good associates among whom he could do ‘building
up’ work (Jer 1:10), namely, the Rechabites, Ebed-melech, and Baruch. Through these friends he
was assisted and delivered from death, and more than once Jehovah’s power was manifested in
protecting him.—Jer 26:7-24; 35:1-19; 36:19-26; 38:7-13; 39:11-14; 40:1-5.
Dramatic Illustrations. Jeremiah performed several small dramas as symbols to Jerusalem
of her condition and the calamity to come to her. There was his visit to the house of the potter
(Jer 18:1-11), and the incident of the ruined belt. (Jer 13:1-11) Jeremiah was commanded not to
marry; this served as a warning of the “deaths from maladies” of the children who would be born
during those last days of Jerusalem. (Jer 16:1-4) He broke a flask before the older men of
Jerusalem as a symbol of the impending smashing of the city. (Jer 19:1, 2, 10, 11) He
repurchased a field from his paternal uncle’s son Hanamel as a figure of the restoration to come
after the 70 years’ exile, when fields would again be bought in Judah. (Jer 32:8-15, 44) Down in
Tahpanhes, Egypt, he hid large stones in the terrace of bricks at the house of Pharaoh,
prophesying that Nebuchadnezzar would set his throne over that very spot.—Jer 43:8-10.
A True Prophet. Jeremiah was acknowledged as God’s true prophet by Daniel, who, by a
study of Jeremiah’s words concerning the 70 years’ exile, was able to strengthen and encourage
the Jews regarding the nearness of their release. (Da 9:1, 2; Jer 29:10) Ezra called attention to
the fulfillment of his words. (Ezr 1:1; see also 2Ch 36:20, 21.) The apostle Matthew pointed to a
fulfillment of one of Jeremiah’s prophecies in the days of Jesus’ young childhood. (Mt 2:17, 18;
Jer 31:15) The apostle Paul spoke of the prophets, among whom was Jeremiah, from whose
writings he quoted, at Hebrews 8:8-12. (Jer 31:31-34) Of these men, the same writer said, “the
world was not worthy of them,” and “they had witness borne to them through their faith.”—Heb
11:32, 38, 39.
7. Son of Habazziniah and father of Jaazaniah; evidently a family head and one of the
Rechabites whom the prophet Jeremiah tested, at Jehovah’s command, by bringing them into
one of the dining rooms of the temple and offering them wine to drink. They refused, in obedience
to the command that had been laid upon them more than two centuries previously by their
forefather Jonadab (Jehonadab) the son of Rechab. For this, Jehovah promised: “There will not
be cut off from Jonadab the son of Rechab a man to stand before me always.”—Jer 35:1-10, 19.
8. A priest (or one representing the priestly house of that name) who returned from Babylonian
exile in 537 B.C.E. with Governor Zerubbabel and High Priest Jeshua.—Ne 12:1.
9. A priest (or one representing a household by that name) among those attesting by seal the
“trustworthy arrangement” entered into before Jehovah by Nehemiah and the princes, priests,
and Levites, to walk in God’s law. If the name stands for a house rather than an individual, this
may be the same as No. 8.—Ne 9:38; 10:1, 2, 29.
10. A priest (or a priestly house) appointed to one of the thanksgiving choirs walking in
procession on the wall of Jerusalem from the Gate of the Ash-heaps to the right, toward the
Water Gate, eventually meeting the other choir at the temple. (Ne 12:31-37) In the days of
Joiakim, Hananiah was head of the paternal house of Jeremiah. (Ne 12:12) If the name Jeremiah
here stands for a house and not for an individual, this may be the same as No. 8.

27
 Conduct “Worthy of the Good News”

THE Bible reveals what is God’s will for his creatures. By studying it one who was previously
without experience or understanding can become wise; it provides a guide to a clean way of life,
which brings a good conscience and rejoicing to the heart. That is why the information found in
the Bible concerning laws, commandments and principles of Jehovah is something more to be
desired than all the material riches in the world. “The law of Jehovah is perfect, bringing back the
soul. The reminder of Jehovah is trustworthy, making the inexperienced one wise. The orders
from Jehovah are upright, causing the heart to rejoice; the commandment of Jehovah is clean,
making the eyes shine. The fear of Jehovah is pure, standing forever. The judicial decisions of
Jehovah are true; they have proved altogether righteous. They are more to be desired than gold,
yes, than much refined gold; and sweeter than honey and the flowing honey of the combs. Also,
your own servant has been warned by them; in the keeping of them there is a large reward.”—Ps.
19:7-11.
2
It can therefore be seen that in order for our conduct to be “worthy of the good news” we
need as a foundation an accurate knowledge of God’s Word the Bible and a sincere appreciation
for the information it contains, along with a wholesome fear of Jehovah. With this proper
foundation we will have the proper view of right and wrong. It will help us avoid the mistake of
cultivating self-righteousness to be seen of men. Of such ones the apostle Paul wrote, at Romans
10:3: “Because of not knowing the righteousness of God but seeking to establish their own, they
did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God.” The sincere worshiper of God does not
want to be like the Pharisees in Jesus’ day, to whom Jesus said: “You . . . , outwardly indeed,
appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.” (Matt. 23:28)
Rather, by a sincere and diligent study of God’s Word the servant of God learns to ‘abhor what is
wicked and cling to what is good.’—Rom. 12:9.
3
Conduct “worthy of the good news” is based on the same two great commandments that
were the basis for God’s dealings with the Israelites, namely, ‘to love God with all one’s heart,
soul, strength and mind and to love one’s neighbor as oneself.’ So, with these two commands in
mind, let us examine some of the basic requirements for righteousness as set forth in the Bible by
our Creator and heavenly Father. As we do so, we shall see that the rules or commands of God
affect different parts of our lives and our relationship with others: our relationship with God, with
our families and with our fellowmen. And as we consider these commands of God, it is not just
blind obedience that is required but, rather, seeking with ‘our whole mind and heart’ to understand
and appreciate why God tells us to do this or that, or not to do a certain thing, so that we may
serve him with understanding.—Phil. 1:9; Matt. 22:37.
4
As we have seen, our relationship with God is of vital importance. Our worship of him must
be clean and pure and undivided. It calls for firm faith in his Word, fearing him alone as God,
giving him exclusive devotion.
5
For us to give this kind of worship to Jehovah and thus come into a proper relationship with
him we must put out of our lives any false practice of worship that is based on wrong teaching, on
paganism or on superstition. Because of superstition some find it difficult to break away from
hurtful fears. A common fear that is manifest in many lands is fear of the “spirits” of the dead, or
fear of those (sometimes called “witches”) who claim supernatural powers. To protect themselves
against such, superstitious people wear charms around the neck or arm or other parts of the
body, these charms being made of different substances, such as, for example, the bones of a
dead child, with the thought that the spirit of the child would provide protection. Likewise
elaborate funeral practices are followed in order to appease the “spirit of the departed one.” All-
night “wakes” are held following a death, with paid mourners making much noise so that the
“spirit” of the dead will not feel he is forgotten or dishonored, and return and bring some evil on
the family. All such ideas are based on the false doctrine that the soul of man is immortal and
continues living after death. The Bible makes it plain that this is not so. (See Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10;
Psalm 146:3, 4.) To follow such practices shows a lack of faith and understanding if it is done by
a professing Christian, and it would demonstrate that he did not appreciate his proper relationship
to Jehovah. True worship requires not only a knowledge of what the Bible says but also faith in it

28
and backing up that faith by actions in harmony with God’s Word. While it is natural to feel
genuine sorrow at losing a loved one in death, the Christian avoids any hypocritical outward show
of sorrow for the sole purpose of satisfying pagan customs or traditions.—Jas. 1:22-25.
6
It is true that there are evil spirits, but these are not the spirits of humans who died some
time in the past. In fact, they were once angelic sons of God who rebelled with Satan and are now
known as demons or wicked spirits. (Jas. 2:19; Rev. 16:14; Eph. 6:12) But the true Christian is
provided with proper armor to defend himself against the machinations of these evil ones. Those
who stand firm in the truth of God’s Word, who are active in proclaiming “the good news of
peace,” who have their faith strong like a large shield and put their hope and trust in Jehovah for
salvation, are assured of protection from any attacks of these wicked ones. (Eph. 6:14-18) The
Christian would never, therefore, resort to demonism or witchcraft for protection or for healing
purposes. The dedicated Christian is commanded by God to put faith in Him.
RESPECT FOR GOD’S LAW ON BLOOD
7
This does not mean that, when a Christian gets physically sick, he foolishly rejects proper
medical help. He does not selfishly expect God to perform a miracle of healing on his behalf.
Rather, the Christian uses good sense in taking reasonable and proper care of his body, and, if
he falls sick, he accepts with gratefulness any medical help that can aid him. But he does not
resort to “faith healing,” since miraculous healing and other such gifts that were present in the
early congregation in the time of the apostles have long since passed away. (1 Cor. 13:8) Nor
does he resort to witchcraft. At the same time he is also alert to see that the kind of medical
treatment he receives does not violate God’s law regarding blood. The divine law concerning
blood applies to Christians today just as it did to the nation of Israel. Though the law covenant
with Israel is no longer in force, God’s law prohibiting the taking of blood into the human body still
applies. This is because it was originally given to the common forefather of mankind, Noah, just
after he came out of the ark after the global flood. On that occasion God plainly stated to Noah:
“Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”—Gen. 9:3-6.
8
The prohibition on the use of blood was made very clear to the Christian congregation at a
special meeting of the apostles and older brothers at Jerusalem some years after the death and
resurrection of Jesus Christ. The inspired decision was: “The holy spirit and we ourselves have
favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep yourselves free
from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If
you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!” (Acts
15:28, 29) You will note that keeping free from blood was considered just as necessary as
keeping free from fornication.
9
It is clear, then, that true Christians are required to show respect for the sanctity of blood,
because it represents life. (Lev. 17:11) Jehovah’s witnesses show this respect by being careful to
avoid any violation of this law. The law on blood applies to any kind of blood, animal or human. A
Christian is under obligation not to eat anything “strangled,” because it has not been bled. The
principle on this matter is stated at Leviticus 17:13: “As for any man . . . who in hunting catches a
wild beast or a fowl that may be eaten, he must in that case pour its blood out and cover it with
dust.” For the same reason an animal that is found dead as a result of being caught in a trap or
being torn by another animal would not be fit for food for a Christian, since it had not been bled at
the time of death. Likewise, when one buys meat, either in a market or from a hunter, the
Christian should be satisfied that the animal was properly bled so that he does not risk a violation
of this law of God. While in most lands licensed slaughterhouses and butchers do bleed meat and
so it is generally safe to eat, this is not always so and especially when we are buying from an
individual hunter. Also, the Christian would not eat sauces in which blood has been mixed. Of
course, a little blood remains in the meat itself even though an animal has been bled; this cannot
be avoided. It is the blood that is flowing through the veins that must be drained off in order to
meet the requirements of God’s law.
10
A very common practice in hospitals throughout the world today is that of giving blood
transfusions in cases where the patient has lost much blood due to an accident or operation, or is
said to require blood to build up strength. In harmony with the scriptures quoted above, Jehovah’s

29
witnesses recognize that to take blood into the body in this way would likewise be a violation of
God’s law. It is quite clearly stated by the apostles: “Keep yourselves free from . . . blood.” This
refusal by Jehovah’s witnesses to take blood into their bodies by medical transfusion is not
because of foolish stubbornness, but because they respect God’s law; they respect His decision
on how blood may be used, since blood represents life, which is a gift from God. At the same time
Jehovah’s witnesses will accept any other medical treatment that does not violate God’s law,
such as transfusions of salt solution or other preparations instead of blood.
11
Everyone wants to live, and it is natural to seek any remedy to prolong life or the lives of
those one loves. However, a dedicated Christian will not seek to save his life in a way that would
violate God’s law. He appreciates that his everlasting life is at stake. He bears in mind the words
of Jesus when he said: “He that finds his soul will lose it, and he that loses his soul for my sake
will find it.” (Matt. 10:39) It takes faith to stick to God’s law at such times, but by doing so the
Christian shows he really is obeying the first great commandment, to love Jehovah with all his
heart, soul, strength and mind. He appreciates that it is his dedicated relationship to Jehovah that
he must guard at all costs.
HONORABLE CONDUCT IN MARRIAGE
12
Man was not meant to live alone. It was Jehovah’s purpose for the earth to be filled with
human creatures, and he arranged for this to come about by men and women coming together in
marriage and building up families. For that reason he created the two sexes, “male and female,”
and to the first pair God gave the command: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth.”
Since Jehovah God is the one who created the different sexes along with their organs of
reproduction, he has the right to decide on what is proper conduct between man and woman.
Rightly, marriage should be treated with honor and respect.—Gen. 1:27, 28.
13
Right from the beginning God made clear certain principles concerning this relationship. The
privilege of sexual relationship between man and woman was to be permitted only in the marriage
state. So it was that after God created the first woman he brought her to the man and gave her to
him as his wife. (Gen. 2:21-24) Although Jehovah later permitted polygamy in the nation of Israel,
that was not the way God established the pattern in Eden, and he does not now permit this for
Christians. Through Christ Jesus he restored the basic principle of marriage, that man should
have but one wife. This principle was clearly understood by the early congregation, and so we
find the requirement for an overseer in the congregation, as recorded at 1 Timothy, chapter 3,
verse 2, that he should be a “husband of one wife.”
14
In lands where the custom is for men to have more than one wife this Bible principle may
present a difficulty to some. A man may have more than one wife, but he hears the “good news,”
appreciates it, and wishes to associate with the New World society of Jehovah’s witnesses. But
his marriage state does not agree with the principles set out in the Bible for Christians; so what is
he to do? Yes, the “good news” in this respect is a challenge to him. It will mean a big change in
his life, putting away all his secondary wives, keeping only the one wife whom he is Scripturally
permitted to have. This is a decision that he must make for himself, but he must make it if he is to
be accepted as a dedicated servant of Jehovah in association with God’s people.
15
The marriage of a man and woman, giving them the right to enjoy the sexual relationship
together, was meant to be a binding tie, not one to be broken for any reason at all. After speaking
of the first marriage in the garden of Eden, Jesus went on to say: “Therefore, what God has
yoked together let no man put apart.” (Matt. 19:6) By these words Jesus showed the seriousness
of marriage for the Christian, that it was not something to be treated lightly. Anything, then, that
would violate the divine marriage arrangement would be unrighteous, hence disobedient and
displeasing to man’s Creator, Jehovah. Since the sexual relationship is to be enjoyed only in the
marriage state, the man with his lawful wife and the woman with her lawful husband, fornication is
forbidden. So it would be improper and in violation of God’s commands for any unmarried man to
have sexual relations with any woman, married or unmarried. Likewise, it would be wrong for an
unmarried woman to have sexual relations with any man. This would rule out any “trial marriage”
that is practiced in some countries, a young couple living together just to see whether they are
suitable, but without entering into a permanent and binding marriage. To the contrary, it is

30
necessary for there to be a proper marriage recognized by both the man and the woman as
binding and permanent, with the marriage properly registered as a testimony to their honorable
intentions, before entering into the marriage privilege of sexual relationship. Even though this may
sometimes take a few months to arrange, yet the young man and woman preparing for marriage
should keep morally clean by refraining from sexual intercourse until the marriage is registered.
By doing this they show proper respect for the divine marriage provision, treating it as something
honorable.
16
After marriage is entered into, the couple must continue to show respect for the marriage
arrangement. The Bible states concerning Christian marriage: “Let marriage be honorable among
all, and the marriage bed be without defilement, for God will judge fornicators and adulterers.”
(Heb. 13:4) Having in mind that Jehovah is the judge and that all our actions are open before him
will help the married man and woman to avoid any unfaithfulness to their marriage partner. Also,
their love for each other strengthens their loyalty to each other and helps avoid unfaithfulness. “In
this way husbands ought to be loving their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves
himself, for no man ever hated his own flesh; but he feeds and cherishes it, as the Christ also
does the congregation, because we are members of his body. ‘For this reason a man will leave
his father and his mother and he will stick to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’”
Certainly the husband would not be loving his wife if he committed adultery with another woman.
Nor would he be loving the other woman, since he would be causing her to sin also and to come
under judgment from God.—Eph. 5:28-31.
17
The man and woman were meant to “stick” to each other. That means to continue firmly
united, both with the desire to make the marriage last. How can this be? Only if the quality of love
is present. In many marriages this quality is often lacking. In some lands there is little or no
companionship between the man and woman in marriage; they do not share their thoughts nor
spend time in each other’s company, not even eating their meals together. Often the woman is
looked upon more as a servant in the house than as a companion and partner in the marriage
contract.
18
What, then, should be the attitude of the Christian man toward his wife? This is well
illustrated at Ephesians 5:25 and 28, which reads: “Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as
the Christ also loved the congregation and delivered up himself for it. In this way husbands ought
to be loving their wives as their own bodies.” Jesus was long-suffering, patient and kind to his
Christian brothers in the congregation. He was happy to be with them and to talk with them about
the wonderful things of God’s kingdom. Besides declaring the “good news” to the general public
in Palestine he spent many hours with his faithful disciples explaining the truth to them. He
showed the deep quality of his love in finally giving up his earthly life as a sacrifice in order that
the congregation might be saved to eternal life. This is the kind of love a husband should have for
his wife. He learns to enjoy her companionship. Because he wants her to gain eternal life, he
gladly seeks opportunities to discuss with her the wonderful hope of life in a new world that he
has learned by means of the “good news.” Even if both husband and wife have accepted the
“good news,” they would continue to speak together of those things to build each other up in faith.
19
It is true that a husband has a duty and obligation of caring for his wife and children in a
material way. The Bible plainly states: “Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his
own, and especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned the faith and
is worse than a person without faith.” (1 Tim. 5:8) But in addition to caring physically he must care
even more for the spiritual needs of his family, just as Christ cared for the congregation.
20
Do you have children? If so, what kind of preparation are you making for their future? A
good education in the world so that they might improve their economic and social position? These
are not the all-important things. Appreciating that marriage is from Jehovah, and that the fruit of
marriage, children, is also a gift of Jehovah, parents who love Jehovah will want their children to
grow up to serve Him. (Ps. 127:3) For this reason, Christian parents will train their children from
an early age in wholesome conduct, in study of the Bible and in declaring the “good news” to
others, all to God’s glory. “And you, fathers, do not be irritating your children, but go on bringing
them up in the discipline and authoritative advice of Jehovah.” If this command is followed, the

31
children will grow up strong spiritually and be able to resist the temptations of the world, and their
faith and right works will be a glory to their parents as well as to Jehovah.—Eph. 6:4.
21
In all these things the wife will give loving support to her husband and head. The wife best
shows her love for her husband in the way she cooperates with him, humbly accepting Jehovah’s
arrangement that “the head of a woman is the man.” (1 Cor. 11:3) By sharing together as
companions in a study of the Bible, in attending meetings with God’s people, in proclaiming the
“good news” to others and in all other activities in the home, the family, husband, wife and
children, will grow together in love and in joy. Appreciation for the “good news of [God’s] kingdom”
will move each sincere person to work toward having his own family life in harmony with these
fine Bible principles.
22
But what can be done where the marriage is not a happy one, where there are
disagreements over religion or over other matters? Are there any grounds upon which such a
marriage might be ended by divorce, allowing the man or woman to marry another partner with
whom they feel they could get along better? The Bible does not permit divorce just for any
reason. While the law of the land may permit a divorce just because a husband and wife do not
get along together and want to be free to marry somebody else, the Bible states only one reason
allowing for a divorce that really brings the marriage to an end, namely, adultery. Jesus made this
clear when he said: “I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of
fornication [that is, adultery], and marries another commits adultery.” (Matt. 19:9) By the act of
adultery the unfaithful mate really becomes one flesh with someone other than his lawful
marriage partner. Of course, the faithful partner may choose to forgive this act and continue to
live with his mate, but if he chooses to divorce because of the adultery of his mate, then he will be
free to marry some other person, since the marriage contract is thus Scripturally as well as legally
broken. In view of the need for understanding and love to make a marriage last, the dedicated
Christian heeds the wise counsel of the Scriptures to marry “only in the Lord,” that is, to marry
one who is, like him, a dedicated Christian.—1 Cor. 7:39.
23
Where the home is divided on matters such as religion, the Christian mate who recognizes
the seriousness of marriage will do all that he can to try to heal the differences that exist in the
home. He will not seek to leave his unbelieving mate, but, rather, through patience and kindness,
work for the salvation of his mate if at all possible.—1 Cor. 7:10-16.
24
Conduct “worthy of the good news” then means more than just talking about it to others and
making a profession of serving God. It must be conduct that comes from putting on the ‘new
personality,’ which is expressed at all times and certainly within the family circle—the husband
toward his wife, the wife toward her husband, the parents toward the children and the children
toward their parents. If your family life, because of custom or for some other reason, falls short of
these Bible requirements, then certainly your hearing this fine counsel from the Bible presents
you with a challenge. Will you make the needed change? If you do, you can be assured of a rich
blessing from Jehovah, the Originator of marriage, and the One who will grant eternal life in a
new world to all obedient families of mankind.
[Study Questions]
1. Of what outstanding value is the Bible to us?
2. How does an accurate knowledge of the Bible guide us in conduct that is “worthy of the good
news”?
3, 4. (a) On what two great commands is right conduct based? (b) The rules and commands of
God affect what relationships, and what relationship is the most important?
5. (a) What things must one put away from his life if he is to be a true worshiper of God? (b) If a
professing Christian were to follow superstitious practices, what would this show?
6. Who are the “evil spirits,” and how do Christians protect themselves against them?
7. (a) What can a Christian do when he gets sick, but what does he not do? (b) Why does God’s
law on the prohibition on the use of blood still apply to us today?

32
8. How was this prohibition on the use of blood made clear at a special meeting of the apostles
and older brothers in Jerusalem?
9. How do Christians show respect for the sanctity of blood in connection with eating meat?
10. Why do Jehovah’s witnesses refuse medical blood transfusions?
11. What principle stated by Jesus at Matthew 10:39 applies in such circumstances?
12. (a) Why has Jehovah the right to decide what is proper conduct between the sexes? (b) How,
then, should marriage be treated?
13. (a) Who only may properly enjoy sexual relations? (b) Is polygamy permitted for Christians, or
what is the standard for them?
14. What decision must be made by a polygamist before he can be accepted as a dedicated
associate in the New World society?
15. (a) How should the marriage bond be viewed? (b) What can be said about fornication and
“trial marriage”? (c) What should first be done in order for a couple to enter into an
honorable marriage?
16, 17. How should a married couple show respect for the marriage arrangement, and what
quality will help them to do so?
18. (a) What example did Jesus set for Christian husbands? (b) In what practical ways does a
husband show love for his wife?
19. In what two ways is a Christian man under obligation to provide for his family?
20. What kind of preparation will Christian parents make for their children, and in what will this
result?
21. How does the Christian wife best show her love for her husband?
22. (a) On what ground only does the Bible allow for divorce that really ends the marriage? (b) In
view of the seriousness of marriage, what wise counsel is to be followed in selecting a
mate?
23. Where there is division in the home, what will the Christian mate strive to do?
24. How may the “good news” present a challenge to the family circle, and to what will answering
this challenge in the right way lead?

Questions From Readers

● A man divorces his wife on unscriptural grounds. After the divorce is granted it becomes
known to the wife and the congregation that just before the divorce the man was guilty of
adultery. Would such an act of adultery free either the man or the woman Scripturally to
remarry?
In this case the crucial question, according to the Holy Scriptures, is, Who divorces whom, and
on what grounds? Who has the right to divorce? According to the Scriptures the moral status of
the husband does not serve as the determining factor that grants him the right to divorce his wife.
To the contrary, the moral status of the one divorced is what determines the right of the divorcer
to bring about the dissolution of the marriage ties. According to the inspired Scriptures it is the

33
unclean marriage mate that is given the bill of divorce by the clean, unadulterous, innocent
marriage mate. The language of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is unmistakable in this regard.
This Deuteronomic law was the one submitted to discussion by the Pharisees in Matthew
19:3-9. Jesus told the Pharisees that God had not given the first man Adam the right to divorce
his wife Eve on any grounds. In reply the Pharisees referred to this Deuteronomic law by asking:
“Why, then, did Moses prescribe giving a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her?” This Mosaic
law specifically cites the uncleanness of the wife who was divorced, not any uncleanness of her
husband, the divorcer. Jesus showed the proper respect for restrictions on the right to divorce the
marriage mate when he said: “Moses, out of regard for your hardheartedness, made the
concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such has not been the case from the beginning. I
say to you that whoever divorces his wife except on the grounds of fornication and marries
another commits adultery.” Since Jesus was here following up his reference to the Mosaic law, he
was talking about a wife’s being divorced on grounds other than her fornication, her adultery, her
uncleanness, not that of her husband. It was for this reason that Joseph of Nazareth thought of
privately divorcing his fiancée, Mary, because he thought there was uncleanness in her; and only
divine intervention prevented this divorce. So it is the guilty one that must be divorced. The guilty
one is not the one who should do the divorcing.
The guilty one is not expected to incriminate himself and then on the basis of his own self-
incrimination divorce the innocent marriage mate. The innocent marriage mate who incriminates
the guilty one must do the divorcing. Hence, if the one divorced proves to be the innocent mate,
then that innocent, unadulterous, divorced one is exposed to immorality. As Jesus said in
Matthew 5:32: “Everyone divorcing his wife except on account of fornication makes her a subject
for adultery, seeing that whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” So the right of the
clean, innocent, unadulterous marriage mate deserves protection, for which reason an
unscriptural divorce of her is out of order. For very personal reasons a wife may choose to
overlook the immorality of her husband, and may continue to give him the marriage due and
receive the marriage due from him. Why? For the very reason that the marriage has not been
dissolved by any adultery on the part of her husband. She has a legal and Scriptural right to keep
living with him. She does not automatically become unclean by having further sex relations with
him after his committing of adultery.
If an adulterous husband does not disclose his adultery to his innocent wife, but notifies her of
his purpose to seek a divorce, then if she consents to this divorce without knowing of his adultery,
but merely with the idea of being legally separated from him by mutual consent under law, then
she enters into the divorce action with him on this basis. He procures the divorce with her consent
and without her contesting. Thus they both agree to this divorce on an unscriptural basis, which
does not free them for remarriage. All they want is to be free from each other, and that is what
they get by the unscriptural but legal divorce. Both of them must take the consequences of this
type of unscriptural divorce. This, of course, deprives her of the Scriptural authorization to
remarry. However, the hypocritical, adulterous husband has tied himself up too, and whereas he
has exposed her to adultery he may find it even harder for himself to resist post-divorce adultery
than she does, inasmuch as he practiced adultery unknown to her before procuring the divorce.
Just because of the ignorance of the wife the Christian congregation is not warranted in setting
aside Jesus’ rule that a husband, if he really wishes to rid himself of his wife on a Scriptural basis,
must do so by taking a divorce from her because of her uncleanness, her adultery. Otherwise, the
husband, even if himself adulterous before the divorce, is not thereafter free to remarry; and she,
even if she did legally remarry, enters thereby into adultery.
The divorcer, regardless of his own personal morality before the divorce, determines the
grounds or terms of the divorce. If now the court grants the divorce on those terms, then the
divorce applies on those terms and it carries to the divorcer the corresponding consequences.
What now if the innocent wife finds out after the divorce to which she consented, or in which
she acquiesced, that her husband had committed adultery one or more times before the divorce,
but had not informed her? This does not alter the situation. It does not entitle her to appeal for a
reversal of the divorce decree, or to appeal for a change of the grounds of divorce so as to make

34
those grounds Scriptural instead of unscriptural ones. It is true that since the divorce she now
comes into possession of new knowledge regarding immorality on the part of her former legal
husband before the divorce. However, she cannot bring this new knowledge to bear. It must be
borne in mind that in the courts of the land when an appeal is made for the reversal of a decision
by a lower court no new evidence or features may be introduced to the appeal court to bring such
new evidence or features to bear upon the appeal court. Only the evidence already submitted and
ruled upon by the lower court can be and is considered by the appeal court in arriving at its own
decision. No reversal or cancellation of the decision of the lower court is allowed on the basis of
any new evidence. This same limitation as to new evidence after a divorce applies also to the
official representatives of a congregation when an innocent, divorced woman, a member of the
congregation, brings to light before them the evidence of the adultery of her former legal
husband, prior to the divorce.
Only immorality after the divorce by either, or both of the divorced parties, would give force
and effect to the legal divorce so as to bring about real dissolution of the marriage ties according
to the Scriptures. Immoral sex relations after a divorce on unscriptural grounds adds something,
not toward reversing the divorce decision on unscriptural grounds, but to confirm the divorce and
to make it more far-reaching. By post-divorce adultery something new has been introduced that
did not appear at the time of the suit for divorce when the terms for the divorce action were set by
the divorcer with the consent or acquiescence of the divorcee. Thus a new factor has been added
since the divorce to validate, not cancel, the divorce decision. This is true even if it is the divorcer
himself that commits the adultery after the divorce.
Adultery before divorce does not dissolve the marriage tie of itself. Sex relations may continue
between the legally married even after such pre-divorce adultery. Up until the step is decided
upon and taken in suing for divorce all sex relations between the legally married couple after the
unfaithful husband had committed adultery would offset the adultery as being a ground for divorce
action to be taken against the adulterous mate.
However, the divorcer by his post-divorce adultery introduces an effective element into the
situation, an element that he himself had not relied upon beforehand when he applied for the
divorce against his innocent wife. He now brings adultery to bear upon the matter even though
this adultery is on his own part. By his post-divorce adultery he now puts into the hands of the
innocent, divorced wife something Scripturally valid that she may hold and apply against the
divorcer. Under the circumstances she does not now need to file for a divorce suit inasmuch as
there is already a legal divorce in effect that has separated them according to the law. But now
the adultery element does make the separation Scriptural and really effects the dissolution of all
marriage bonds, and this before God and his Christian congregation as well as before the law of
the land. In regard to the unscriptural divorce this effect was not the case previous to such
divorce forasmuch as the woman was still the adulterous mate’s wife by reason of the then still-
existing legal marriage.
In this case where the Christian congregation was not privately advised beforehand of any
other basic ground for the divorce, any really Scriptural ground underlying the divorce suit, a
divorce must be held to the terms of the divorce upon which the divorcer sued. A divorce sticks,
on its own grounds, not on some imaginary possibility of what might have been done on the basis
of fuller knowledge. Hence no retroactive action may be allowed beyond what the divorce
grounds actually are by stipulation, for the purpose of adjusting the scope and effect of the
divorce to agree with additional knowledge or discovery of incriminating evidence. This strict
holding to the divorce terms prevents any collusion being carried on by the divorced couple who
might agree to trump up something valid that might free them or rid them of the tight restrictions
upon them due to the unscripturalness of their divorce.
The hard consequences of the unscriptural divorce bear just as heavily upon the divorcer as
upon the divorcee. Therefore the hard consequences of an unscriptural divorce should stand as a
warning to any prospective divorcer so that he will consider first the limitations and restrictions
and dangers that would result from his unscriptural course to his own self as well as to his
innocent marriage mate. It is not the prerogative or obligation of the Christian congregation to

35
relieve the divorced couple of the hard consequences of their unscriptural divorce. In its tendency
toward mercy the Christian congregation must not go beyond what is written in God’s Word and
attempt a reversal of the situation by doing something that it is not authorized to do. A man that
forces an unscriptural divorce through becomes very responsible toward the innocent,
undeserving mate inasmuch as he makes the post-divorce life and course of her very hard with
respect to morality. If the innocent divorcee goes bad, the Christian congregation is not primarily
responsible for not sanctioning her remarriage before the death or post-divorce adultery of her ex-
husband. The self-seeking divorcer is the responsible one, according to the Scriptures. All that
the Christian congregation can do legitimately is to help her to grow straight morally as a
Christian by extending to her all the spiritual help possible.
Because of his adultery, unrepented of before the divorce, the unfaithful husband could be
disfellowshiped by the Christian congregation of which he may be a baptized member. By
concealing his adultery from wife and congregation he may postpone his disfellowshipment for a
time. If in addition to his concealed adultery he undertakes to divorce his innocent wife, then he
shows that he has not repented of his adultery. Neither does he have his wife’s forgiveness for it.
Hence he must be disfellowshiped by the congregation when the facts of the matter become
known. To the wrong that he has committed against his wife by the adultery that he has
concealed from her he hardheartedly adds injury by suing for divorce from her in her innocence.
For his moral uncleanness, of which his hypocritical, unloving course shows he has not repented,
he must be disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation on the basis of the evidence laid
before the congregation’s judicial committee.
● What is the meaning of Job 19:26? In the King James Version it reads the opposite of
the way it does in the American Standard Version; the one saying, “Yet in my flesh shall I
see God,” and the other, “Then without my flesh shall I see God.”—J.G., U.S.A.
The New World Translation of Job 19:26 reads: “Yet reduced in my flesh I shall behold God.”
Under footnote b it gives two alternate renderings: “Yet out of my flesh,” and, “Yet apart from my
flesh.” The American Standard Version, which reads “without my flesh,” has a footnote reading,
“Yet from my flesh shall I see God.”
Why these differences in translations and the presence of the footnotes? These are no doubt
due to the ambiguity of the Hebrew text. However, the thought seems to be that Job, when so
wasted away as to be merely skin and bones, and thus practically “without flesh,” or “reduced in
my flesh,” would “see” God. Job cannot be accused of here speaking ill-advisedly, as some would
have it, but rather prophetically. He himself did later “see” God by seeing the manifestation of his
power, by hearing his voice by means of the Word or Logos, and by having the eyes of his
understanding opened to see the truth about God. Because of this he could say: “In hearsay I
have heard about you, but now my own eye does see you.”—Job 42:5.
Not that faithful Job himself literally saw Jehovah God, for God plainly told Moses: “You are
not able to see my face, because no man may see me and yet live.” The apostle John testified to
the same effect, saying: “No man has seen God at any time.” “At no time has anyone beheld
God.”—Ex. 33:20; John 1:18; 1 John 4:12.

Questions From Readers

● What is the significance of the characters on the lower right-hand corner of the cover of
the book “Let Your Name Be Sanctified”?—B. P., U.S.A.
On the lower right-hand corner of the front cover of the book “Let Your Name Be Sanctified”
appears an impression of an open Bible, with the Tetragrammaton reproduced in four different
styles of Hebrew lettering. The first style is shown on page 113 of the book as occurring on the

36
Moabite Stone. The next style, which appears underneath in Phoenician or Palaeo-Hebrew
letters, occurs in an ancient recension of the Septuagint Version of the Minor Prophets,
containing parts of Habakkuk, a page of which is reproduced on page 424 of Volume 5 of the
New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. The third style of lettering, appearing at the
upper right in the impression, is the style that appears in the text of ancient Greek versions, such
as are listed on page 413 of the Appendix of the New World Translation of the Hebrew
Scriptures, Volume 5, and as also found illustrated in the footnotes of Volume 3 of the New World
Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, beginning with footnote “c” on page 295. The fourth
lettering of the Tetragrammaton is that of the modern block style and may be seen on page 3, or
the title page, of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures in its revised edition of A.D.
1961.
● Is there no hope at all that one of the “great crowd” who dies now before Armageddon
will be reunited with his marriage partner as that one’s mate in the new world and share in
the fulfillment of the procreation mandate?
Hope is based upon God’s Word, not on sentimentality. The stark Bible truth remains: Human
marriage is dissolved by the death of one of the married partners. (Rom. 7:1-3) For this reason,
the Christian dying now has no right to bind his surviving partner to stay single in the hope that in
the resurrection they may be reunited.
The surviving one is not proving unfaithful to his dead marriage mate by afterward marrying
someone else. As long as the departed mate was alive, the surviving one gave that one the
fullness of his love, loyalty and devotion and did not prove unfaithful therein. So on this score the
departing one has no fault to find.
The survivor, however, has to live a normal life after the death of the beloved marriage mate.
Circumstances and developments may dictate that he remarry according to the Scriptures. He is
free to do so. The deceased one has no strings attached to him, for the deceased one cannot
give the surviving one the marriage dues during the interim between now and the resurrection of
the dead. God makes no exceptions with regard to this law that dissolves marriage by the death
of one of the marriage mates. He would be doing so if he allowed for former marriage mates to be
reunited as man and wife by means of the resurrection and to take part with Armageddon
survivors in fulfilling the procreation mandate.
This is correspondingly true of Christians who are not of the “great crowd” of “other sheep” but
who are Christ’s spiritual brothers and who are therefore joint heirs with Jesus Christ for the
heavenly kingdom. For these also death dissolves the marriage tie. Hence in the resurrection of
the dead to life in heaven the former married couple will not be reunited in heaven as man and
wife or even as the most intimate companions. To such spiritual new creatures it is written: “From
now on we know no man according to the flesh. Even if we have known Christ according to the
flesh, certainly we now know him so no more.” (2 Cor. 5:16) Certainly, then, if such a “new
creature” Christian has died and experienced a spiritual resurrection to life in heaven without the
fleshly body that lies moldering there in the grave, the surviving spirit-begotten marriage mate
cannot know the departed one any longer according to the flesh. There is no more flesh about the
resurrected joint heir of Christ. Marriage as of man and wife for the producing of children is a
thing that belongs to the flesh, not to the spirit. Consequently, a surviving spirit-begotten Christian
with heavenly hopes should not feel that he should stay single and not remarry under the idea of
staying free to rejoin his former marriage partner in the heavenly kingdom. He should not
entertain the hope that his staying single and remaining exclusively attached in his affections to
but one earthly marriage partner will be recognized and be rewarded by Jesus Christ, and that
Christ will therefore reunite the former marriage couple in the resurrection and in the affairs,
arrangements and activities of the heavenly kingdom.
So for dead ones with spiritual, heavenly hopes and for dead ones with earthly Paradisaic
hopes the rule enunciated by Jesus Christ stands unaltered: “In the resurrection neither do men
marry nor are women given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven.” (Matt. 22:30) At the flood
of Noah’s day angels were punished for entering into marriage, which in that instance was with
the daughters of men because they were so lovely-looking. (Gen. 6:1-4) In the resurrection of the

37
“other sheep” on earth, no former married person will have occasion to envy another former
married person, as would be the case if this latter one got back his former marriage mate who
had remained single, whereas the envious marriage mate does not get back his former partner
because this partner remarried and survived Armageddon with his new marriage mate. What the
resurrection promises men is, not remarriage, but reliving, and this under God’s kingdom by
Christ. Is that not something satisfying? Has anyone a right to demand more through Christ’s
sacrifice? Christ died for you, not to marry, but to live! Let us not be swayed or overcome by
sentimentalism or emotionalism.

Upholding the Honorableness of Marriage

“Let marriage be honorable among all, and the marriage bed be without defilement,
for God will judge fornicators and adulterers.”—Heb 13:4.

MARRIAGE, entered into, should be maintained with honor as an arrangement set up by God
himself. Marriage should also be approached in honor. Marriage is a serious, responsible thing
that has presented many problems outside of the Paradise of Eden where it was begun; and an
honorable approach to it ought to have a beneficial effect. It ought to help the marriage to be
successful. Really, by marriage the man and the wife ought to strive to honor God, the loving
heavenly Father who provided for this union which would have been completely blissful had it
been continued in Paradise. Rightly, God would be expected to bless the union of such a God-
honoring couple. But if his laws and rules for a successful marriage are ignored and violated, God
could not be expected to bless but should be expected to execute judgment. Unhappiness and
suffering are certain to follow. God made laws governing all the other things of his creation;
likewise he made laws governing this privileged arrangement of marriage. Married couples, or
those thinking of getting married, honor Him by considering his laws and regulations recorded in
his sacred Book, the Bible. This makes for divine blessing and success.
2
God’s heavenly Son did not become the man Jesus Christ in order to marry one of the
daughters descended from the sinner Adam. That was not God’s will for him. However, Jesus did
honor marriage among God’s people. When he accepted the invitation and attended the marriage
celebration in Cana of Galilee, he performed his first miracle on earth, that of changing water into
wine of the best kind, in order to contribute to the joy and gladness of the occasion. (John 2:1-11)
He highly respected this arrangement of God for man’s happiness; and it was he who said: “What
God has yoked together let no man put apart.” (Matt. 19:6) He advocated the ideal human
marriage, making it the rule for his followers.
3
The Christian apostle Paul had the same high regard for marriage as did his Master, Jesus
Christ, the Son of God. Paul said: “Let marriage be honorable among all, and the marriage bed
be without defilement, for God will judge fornicators and adulterers.” (Heb. 13:4) In figurative
language Paul referred to the approach that the Christian congregation makes to marriage with
the glorified heavenly Jesus Christ as her spiritual Bridegroom. Here are Paul’s words to
members of this Christian congregation: “Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ
also loved the congregation and delivered up himself for it, that he might sanctify it, cleansing it
with the bath of water by means of the word [of God], that he might present the congregation to
himself in its splendor, not having a spot or a wrinkle or any of such things, but that it should be
holy and without blemish.” (Eph. 5:25-27) How honorable the approach must be to that grandest
of marriages, that of Jesus Christ and his faithful congregation of 144,000 members!
4
Showing anxiety for the proper preparation and approach to marriage, the apostle Paul also
wrote to the congregation: “I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy, for I personally promised
you in marriage to one husband that I might present you as a chaste virgin to the Christ. But I am
afraid that somehow, as the serpent seduced Eve by its craftiness, your minds might be corrupted

38
away from the sincerity and the chastity that are due the Christ.” (2 Cor. 11:2, 3) Also, with more
direct reference to personal conduct in this regard, Paul wrote: “This is what God wills, the
sanctifying of you, that you abstain from fornication; that each one of you should know how to get
possession of his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in covetous sexual appetite such as
also those nations have which do not know God.”—1 Thess. 4:3-5.
5
In the normal, regular course of things, all human life works toward males getting married to
females, with a view to being fruitful and producing children in one’s image and likeness. (Gen.
5:1-3) When a boy reaches the age of from thirteen to sixteen years and the girls the age of from
eleven to fourteen years, the reproductive organs come to maturity. The boy and girl reach what
is called the age of puberty or adulthood, and they can perform their respective parts in bringing
children into the world.
6
God’s purpose was that each human creature be endowed with ability to produce children in
the course of time and thus be able to enjoy married life and to serve its purpose until the filling of
the earth with righteous, godlike adult humans had been accomplished. (Gen. 1:26-28)
Accordingly, God created man and woman with sex organs for a wonderful purpose in harmony
with the divine will. These sex organs are therefore not to be treated as playthings, nor are they to
be abused, misused or misapplied. The proper care of sex organs applies both before marriage
and after marriage, in order to conduce toward successful, happy marriage. When we take a
long-range view of matters, the healthy, helpful preparation of a child for future marriage really
begins before that child’s birth. Yes, in that respect a heavy responsibility rests on its parents,
who should think not only of their child but also of their grandchild. No one, either the parents or
persons not the parents, should want or has the right to mar a child’s opportunity, privilege and
natural right to enter into clean, honorable marriage.
7
If we have due respect for our own right and privilege to get married, we will want to get
ourselves ready to undertake it in honor. We will also have due respect for the right of another
person, a boy or a girl, a man or a woman, to get married in a worthy, honorable way. This means
that we would not want to contaminate or corrupt ourselves or others, so as to be in an unclean
condition when entering in upon this honorable estate of wedlock.
GOOD MORALS
8
This calls for us to develop good morals. Parents or guardians of children should teach them
the facts of life. This the parents can do in a clean, respectable, upbuilding way. Regardless of
whether some medical doctors may think so, the “gutter” or the slum alley is not the place for
boys and girls to learn the facts of life, or, rather, the abuse, perversion, degradation and idolatry
of sex. For thousands of years the Creator’s own Book, the Holy Bible, has been the best book on
earth to teach adults and children the basic facts of life, as to how we got here from Adam and
Eve, why there are both males and females, and how we may each choose to perform our parts
in a godly way toward the present continuation and extending of the human family. Parents and
guardians should be wise and use the Bible in revealing the noble facts of life to the curious,
inquiring minds of maturing children. Thereby they can counteract the debasing influence of the
“gutter.” In this way they help the children early in making the proper approach to marriage in later
life. Now that the prophetic Word of God holds forth the hope of surviving the universal war of
Armageddon, how grand a privilege parents today have of possibly preparing their children for
marriage as survivors of Armageddon into God’s righteous world, in Paradise restored to earth!
9
All persons who now pursue peace because of loving a godly life and wanting to see good
days forever under God’s kingdom need to watch their morals continually. According to published
reports on world conditions, never has mankind been living in a more corrupt world, at least since
the immoral preflood world of the days of Noah. Fornication, adultery, sodomy and bestiality are
increasingly being indulged in to a shocking degree. Nineteen hundred years ago the apostle
Paul commented on the immorality in the pagan world and recommended a safeguard for
Christians. He wrote to fellow believers at Corinth, Greece, saying: “Now concerning the things
about which you wrote, it is well for a man not to have intercourse with a woman; yet, because of
prevalence of fornication, let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own
husband.” (1 Cor. 7:1, 2) Paul prescribed honorable marriage.

39
 10
However, in view of “prevalence of fornication” today, it is a question not only of avoiding
fornication before marriage but also of abstaining from adultery after marriage. Today multitudes
of attractive women are willing to sell or offer their bodies for sale for the illegal satisfying of the
sexual passions of immoral men. Today there are multitudes of boys and men who are likewise
willing to sell their bodies and become effeminate, “men kept for unnatural purposes,” in order to
satisfy the lust of men who prefer to lie carnally with males similar to how a man lies with a
woman; which is a “detestable thing.” (1 Cor. 6:9; Rom. 1:27; Lev. 18:22) In a warning, God’s
Word shows the fearful consequences of immorality.
11
In this connection the apostle Paul explains to us the significance of love, saying: “He that
loves his fellow man has fulfilled the law. For the law code, ‘You must not commit adultery,’ . . .
and whatever other commandment there is, is summed up in this word, namely, ‘You must love
your neighbor as yourself.’” (Rom. 13:8, 9) There is no love of neighbor expressed in fornication,
adultery or sodomy. It is only the letting of burning passion take control with much harm to follow
physically, socially and spiritually, the conscience also being affected. With great frankness God’s
Word warns His people against professional prostitutes or any girl or woman who wants to play
the harlot for the time being, designedly playing up to the male victim. Lending oneself to become
the victim of an immoral person’s wiles is the start of what may end up with death, physical death
as well as spiritual death. The very reason why God’s Word has something to say on this matter
is this:
12
“To deliver you from the strange woman, from the foreign woman [foreign to God] who has
made her own sayings smooth, who is leaving the confidential friend of her youth and who has
forgotten the very covenant of her God [if she is dedicated to God and under the new covenant
made with God’s people]. For down to death her house does sink and down to those impotent in
death her tracks. None of those having relations with her will come back, nor will they regain the
paths of those living.”—Prov. 2:16-19.
13
Immorality may be the way to what loose men and women call “sophistication,” the making
of a person worldly-wise; but it is not the way to clean, pure wisdom, life-giving wisdom. It is not
the way to real living. Those having company with the immoral may never regain the path of
those on the way to everlasting life. Sooner or later they may land in the place from which they
cannot now come back, the place of no-return, Sheol, the common grave of mankind, or, even
worse still, the place of eternal annihilation, Gehenna. This is no matter for the sophisticated to
smirk at indifferently, unconcernedly, in this penicillin age. It is something for all, for those growing
up and for the grownups, the virgin and single and the married, to ponder over in the light of
plainly stated, long-recorded heavenly wisdom. Beware of immoral persons, both those outside
the organization of God’s people and those who might hang onto it or might creep into it and
outwardly establish themselves in it. Guard against harboring and cultivating immoral desires. Do
not be like the inexperienced youth, who lacked a good heart, a moral heart, a good, clean
motive, and who therefore put himself in the way of easy approach by a slave of immorality:
14
“Passing along on the street near her corner, and in the way to her house he marches, in
the twilight, in the evening of the day, at the approach of the night and the darkness. And look!
there was a woman to meet him, with the garment of a prostitute and cunning of heart. . . . Now
she is outdoors, now she is in the public squares, and near every corner she lies in wait. And she
has grabbed hold of him and given him a kiss. She has put on a bold face . . . She has misled him
by the abundance of her persuasiveness. By the smoothness of her lips she seduces him. All of a
sudden he is going after her, like a bull that comes even to the slaughter, and just as if fettered for
the discipline of a foolish man, until an arrow cleaves open his liver, just as a bird hastens into the
trap, and he has not known that it involves his very soul [or, life].”—Prov. 7:7-23; marginal
reading.
15
If you are being tempted by someone immoral, imagine yourself like a bull being led along
by a thorn through the nose or by a nose ring subduedly to your own slaughter. Is the picture
funny? Do you laugh at yourself? The immoral person’s words of inducement, “Stolen waters
themselves are sweet” (Prov. 9:17), may for the few minutes be pleasantly fulfilled in sexual
satisfaction, but where do you find yourself? In a trap of death like a bird! Alas, to your great pain,

40
an arrow of death cleaves open your liver. Comes sorrow, yes, death-dealing pain thereafter.
Also, torment of conscience!
16
The inspired book of Proverbs was pointedly, yes, specifically correct in saying that a deadly
arrow cleaves open the liver of the immoral. The liver is a target for disease organisms. In
laboratories it has been found by medical doctors that the tiny corkscrew-like organism
associated with the terrible venereal disease called syphilis can frequently be detected in great
numbers in the liver cells, although it has been found also in the tissues of the lungs, spleen and
heart. In the case of the other terrible disease called gonorrhea, the bacterial gonococcus that
causes the disease can be taken up by the body’s blood vessels and be distributed to affect not
only the genital organs but almost every organ of the human body, getting into the lining
membrane of the liver, the largest gland in man’s body, as well as of the brain, spinal cord, heart
and other organs. The Bible is thus medically correct.
17
When a passionate person willfully courts immorality, he is flirting with death. When a
person lets himself become passionate under improper circumstances and yields to the flattering,
inflaming, subtle invitations and urgings to immorality, he little appreciates for the time being the
frightful danger into which he is swooning or yielding himself. He is collapsing onto the road of
disease, yes, lack of ease and of peace, the road to Sheol, mankind’s common grave. Either he
does not care or he forgets or does not know he is laying himself open to the getting of loathsome
syphilis, which with alcoholism and tuberculosis is branded as one of the three great plagues
afflicting humanity today.
18
Third-degree manifestations of syphilis, affecting the brain, the eyes, the liver, and so forth,
have the greatest significance for the human body. In this case the lesions of the brain and spinal
cord rank first in frequency and seriousness. Most of all to be feared are lesions of the nerve
centers. These may lead on to locomotor ataxia and general paralysis, to paresis (partial
paralysis), or to paralysis to one half lengthwise of the body. Besides, there may be hereditary
effects passed to one’s children born thereafter.
19
It is said that “no disease has such a murderous influence upon the offspring as syphilis.”
When both father and mother are syphilitic, the infection of their child is almost unavoidable. First
pregnancies may end up in abortions; then there are stillborn children or a child alive at birth but
soon dying; then syphilitic children, tainted, having native weakness or inborn incapacity for life,
children stunted physically and mentally, often feeble-minded or even idiotic, yes, children that
are monstrosities. What a way to prepare one’s child to approach future marriage with honor!
20
Every syphilitic person is a source of possible danger to a person with whom that one
comes in close contact, whether that be a wife or a husband or children. One fears to pick up a
newspaper or magazine or wipe on a towel wiped on by a syphilitic person, or swim in his
neighborhood. In connection with marriage, The Encyclopedia Americana says: “It is especially,
however, in its relation with marriage that the ravages of syphilis as a social plague are of the
highest interest and importance. . . . A syphilitic man should not marry so long as he is capable of
carrying contagion to his wife or begetting syphilitic children. . . . The syphilitic man may be
exposed to dangers, the consequences from his disease, which unfit him for the responsible
position of head and support of a family. The possible existence of such disqualifying conditions
must always be taken into consideration when the question of marriage is concerned.”—Volume
26, edition of 1929, page 180.
21
You parents, yes, you children also, here is some news for you to consider as a sort of
barometer of venereal disease throughout the earth. A nationwide study in the United States has
disclosed in this year 1960 that venereal disease is increasing in the nation. Teen-agers are
becoming more and more implicated in diseases of “sexual love.” Shamelessly, one girl, about
thirteen or fourteen years old, named eighty males with whom she had had sexual connections.
According to the report, during the two years of 1957 and 1958, the number of children within the
age limits of ten to fourteen years having infectious venereal disease rose from 2,443 to 2,793, or
14.3 percent. The number in the fifteen- to nineteen-year age group increased 11.4 percent. By
one director of a Social Health Association it is estimated that there were actually 60,000 new

41
cases of syphilis and more than a million new cases of gonorrhea, including an uncounted
number that go unreported.—New York Times, February 24, 1960.
22
On April 5, 1960, a United States Federal expert said that cases of infectious syphilis in the
country had showed an increase of 42 percent in the last half of 1959 over the like period of 1958.
The increase was pronounced “terribly alarming,” especially in certain large cities.—New York
Times, April 6, 1960.
23
It is foolish for the immorally inclined to depend upon the power of penicillin to offset the
venereal diseases and so think that they can take chances. Despite the penicillin at hand today,
those diseases named after the pagan goddess of sexual love, Venus, are on the increase.
These cannot safely be played with but must be strictly guarded against. No longer is the disease
of gonorrhea medically considered to be the innocent, inconsequential disease that it used to be
considered. The medical profession now considers gonorrhea as one of the most formidable
social plagues of our time. One’s getting this plague through immorality is certainly not conducive
to peaceful, successful, happy marriage. Gonorrhea in a parent can result in partial or even
complete loss of sight to a child born to such diseased parent. In cases of newborn children it is
estimated that from ten to twenty percent of all blindness is due to infection by that microorganism
known as the gonococcus.
24
Gonorrhea in women may become so serious as to blight absolutely their hope of having
children. Gonorrhea is one of the most fruitful causes of female barrenness. Complications can
also cause sterility in men. It is believed that gonorrhea in the male partner is accountable for 45
percent of childless marriages. Seventy percent or more of the sterility in women is because of a
husband’s communicating gonorrhea to his wife. The report is that every year thousands of
young, innocent wives are thus infected, husbands in many cases unknowingly contributing to
wrecking the health and lives of their marriage partners. Wives may thus be reduced to semi-
invalidism, inability to walk, and suffering in other ways. Finally, they may feel obliged to call in a
surgeon for relief and be castrated by knifing out their God-given generative organs. If the
responsible disease is traceable to immoral conduct on the part of one marriage mate or of both,
it is indeed a heavy price to pay for breaking God’s law, for just a fleeting pleasure.
“BETTER TO MARRY”—WHEN AND WHY THEN?
25
In this world where fornication and adultery abound as never before, according to the
apostle Paul’s advice it is not the course of unwisdom to have a marriage mate, so that one
marries in order not to sin. Then one that gives up his singleness does well. As respects the
single persons, Paul says: “If they do not have self-control, let them marry, for it is better to marry
than to be inflamed with passion.” (1 Cor. 7:2, 8, 9, 38) If one does decide to take steps toward
marriage, one should do so with all honorableness, in respect for God’s laws and heavenly
wisdom, in this way approaching one’s future mate clean, guiltless as to fornication. If he is a
married man, then he should honor his marriage bed and abstain from adultery. Said the famous
German physician and author, Max S. Nordau: “No matter how deeply we may be in love with a
certain individual, we do not cease to be susceptible to the influence of the entire sex.” One’s
observation of some or many marriage couples seems to confirm this doctor’s statement.
Doubtless all have to be on guard these days, whether married or not. To the married man or the
single man who intends to marry, Proverbs 5:15-23 says:
26
“Drink water out of your own cistern, and tricklings out of the midst of your own well [that is,
out of your legal marriage mate as a wellspring of sexual happiness and pleasure]. Should your
springs [of sexual satisfaction] be scattered out of doors [where the harlots lie in wait], your
streams of water [for sexual refreshment] in the public squares themselves [where prostitutes
offer themselves for a price]? Let them prove to be for you alone [with your marriage mate], and
not for strangers with you. Let your water source [your source of sexual gratification] prove to be
blessed [not cursed by God], and rejoice with the wife of your youth, a lovable hind and a
charming mountain goat. Let her own breasts [not those of immoral women] intoxicate you at all
times. With her love may you be in an ecstasy constantly. So why should you, my son, be in an
ecstasy with a strange woman or embrace the bosom of a foreign woman? For the ways of a man
are in front of the eyes of Jehovah, and he is contemplating all his tracks. His own errors will

42
catch the wicked one, and in the ropes of his own sin he will be taken hold of. He will be the one
to die because there is no discipline [no self-discipline, no taking of discipline], and because in the
abundance of his foolishness he goes astray.”
27
A married Christian is obligated to be satisfied with his one wife. If a dedicated Christian
wants to have a woman, he should marry her honorably. A married Christian should not want to
supplement his wife by other women inside the Christian congregation or outside it and thereby
have cisterns, wells, springs or water streams from which to draw sexual pleasure “out of doors
[outside his own home]” and out “in the public squares.” An unfaithful marriage mate may try to do
this in secret or under darkness, but let such person remember that the ways of a dedicated
Christian are “in front of the eyes of Jehovah” and that Jehovah “is contemplating all his tracks.”
Nothing escapes Jehovah as Judge. He warns us that sneak errors of any Christian will catch up
with him as a wicked person. He will realize it when, maybe, he finds that he has had a shameful
disease burned into his body, or his reproductive powers are killed, or his wife becomes sterile or
gives birth to a stillborn child or a blinded child or a deformed or diseased child.
28
He may painfully be brought to realize concerning the immoral woman with whom he
became one flesh that “the aftereffect from her is as bitter as wormwood; it is as sharp as a two-
edged sword. Her feet are descending to death. Her very steps take hold on Sheol itself. The
path of life she does not contemplate. . . . you have to groan in your future when your flesh and
your organism come to an end. And you will have to say: ‘How I have hated discipline and my
heart has disrespected even reproof! And I have not listened to the voice of my instructors, and to
my teachers I have not inclined my ear. Easily I have come to be in every sort of badness in the
midst of the congregation and of the assembly.’”—Prov. 5:3-14.
29
Besides the disease and pain that the Christian turning to immorality may bring upon his
own flesh, upon his wife who is one flesh with him, and upon his future children, he brings
disunity, mistrust and unpeacefulness into his married life. But worse than this, he brings himself
into the way of spiritual death. He pays the price of the disapproval of God, whose eyes have
been upon his ways and tracks. When this heavenly Judge unfailingly causes the errors of the
wicked one to catch him and the binding ropes of his own sin to take hold on him, Jehovah brings
him to judgment before his earthly congregation, the Christian assembly. As a disgrace to God
and his congregation he is disfellowshiped, cast out of the congregation in dishonor to where the
dead world is. Proverbs 22:14 warns: “The mouth of strange women is a deep pit. The one
denounced by Jehovah will fall into it.” Knowing whom Jehovah God denounces, do we want to
suffer his denunciation by falling into the deep pit of immorality opened up for us by the honey-
flowing mouth of an immoral person, woman or man? Do we want to be denounced out of
Jehovah’s clean, approved organization?
30
Not of our own wanting, the way of moral uncleanness may be enticingly opened up to us.
Then let us remember just who we are because of having dedicated ourselves to Jehovah God. If
you are a dedicated Christian whom God has called to form part of the heavenly bride of his Son
Jesus Christ and who is thus espoused to Christ, then to you Paul says: “Do you not know that
your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I, then, take the members of the Christ away and make
them members of a harlot? Never may that happen! What! Do you not know that he who is joined
to a harlot is one body [with her]? For, ‘The two,’ says he [in the creation account of Genesis
2:24], ‘will be one flesh.’ But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Flee from fornication. Every
other sin which a man may commit is outside his body, but he that practices fornication is sinning
against his own body.”—1 Cor. 6:15-18.
31
So if a member of Christ’s spiritual body commits immorality with one of the opposite sex,
man or woman, that one is trying to take a member of Christ’s body and make it one flesh with
the immoral person in fornication or adultery. Do you think that Christ Jesus will consent to being
made one with a harlot or an adulteress? Not for a moment! One cannot be one flesh with a
morally unclean person and at the same time “one spirit” with the Lord Jesus Christ. By sexually
making oneself one flesh with the morally filthy, one is sinning against one’s own flesh. One’s
impure, illegal fleshly union may possibly result in contracting a horrible disease and in other
death-dealing consequences to the flesh. This may include the Christian congregation’s handing

43
over the immoral member to Satan “for the destruction of the flesh,” in order that the spirit of the
clean congregation may be saved in the day of the Lord. That is what Paul did with an incestuous
member of the congregation of Corinth in his day. “Remove the wicked man from among
yourselves,” the apostle authoritatively ordered.—1 Cor. 5:4, 13.
32
Even if you are not a member of the spiritual “body of Christ” but are dedicated to God in
hope of his new world of righteousness, then think of what you are before indulging in immorality.
Think of making your flesh, flesh belonging to the New World society of Jehovah’s witnesses,
“one flesh” with an immoral person! Does the New World society consent to your making it “one
flesh” or one unit with the fornicator or adulterous person? Not for a moment! If you have no
respect for it and its good name, God’s spirit will not let it have any respect for you in your
immorality. It cannot count you one of it, for you bring reproach on it and on the God whose name
it bears; and thus you are a stumbling block to others.
33
This is something for missionary girls to think of seriously in their foreign assignments, when
they are ardently pursued by smoothly operating native boys or men who put on a front of interest
in the Bible message borne by the missionary girl and then try them out with improper suggestive
advances, to soften them up. This is something to think about for dedicated Christian young
people who are coming into marriageable years and who may be dreaming of happy, successful
marriage under God’s blessing either before or after the battle of Armageddon. This is something
for all dedicated members of the New World society to think about in this degraded, immoral
world of temptation, in which we are under obligation to keep moral integrity to God. Do not try to
learn “the hard way.”
34
As we reflect on the seriousness of the matter, we feel moved to offer the prayer offered by
the psalmist after he had committed a grievous moral mistake: “Create in me even a pure heart,
O God, and put within me a new spirit, a steadfast one.”—Ps. 51:10.
[Study Questions]
1. (a) How should marriage be approached and maintained, if it is to be beneficial? (b) What on
the part of the married couple makes for divine blessing and success?
2. Did Jesus Christ marry on earth, and what was his attitude toward marriage among God’s
people?
3. How did Paul express himself toward marriage, and how did he describe the approach that the
Christian congregation makes to its marriage to Christ?
4. How did Paul express himself in anxiety for the successful marriage of the Christian
congregation?
5. In the physical developing of boys and girls, toward what does the normal course of human life
work?
6. How are sex organs rightly to be considered, and does anyone have the right to interfere with
a child’s finally entering into clean marriage?
7. What will be our proper course if we respect our own right to get married and also the right of
another person to do so?
8. (a) What, therefore, should parents do respecting their inquiring, curious children, and what is
the best book of aid in that behalf? (b) For what privilege may parents now help to prepare
their children?
9. What do peace-pursuing Christians need to watch always, and what did Paul prescribe for
them amid an immoral world?
10. Today what question faces one before and after marriage, and what offers to immorality
widely present themselves today?
11. (a) Is love of neighbor expressed in immorality, or what? (b) Lending oneself to immoral
advances by another may end up how?

44
12. According to Proverbs 2:16-19, what is the reason that God’s Word says something on this
matter?
13, 14. (a) Why is immorality not the way to real living, and of whom should we members of a
congregation beware? (b) Like what inexperienced youth should we not be?
15. In harmony with that comparison, how should we picture ourselves when tempted by
someone immoral, and so where would we find ourselves for yielding to temptation?
16. How is the Bible shown to be medically correct when speaking of how an arrow cleaves open
the liver of the immoral one?
17. When one willfully courts immorality, with what is one flirting, and to what is one laying oneself
open?
18. Why do third-degree manifestations of syphilis have the greatest significance for our human
bodies?
19. Why has no disease such a murderous influence upon one’s offspring as syphilis?
20. Why is a syphilitic person a source of possible danger to others, and, as a social plague, why
does it make marriage inadvisable for anyone infected with it?
21. To what extent did a nationwide study in the United States published in 1960 show venereal
disease to be increasing?
22. What did a United States Federal expert say in 1960 regarding the increase of infectious
syphilis?
23. Why is the use of penicillin today no offset to the contracting of venereal disease and why is
the getting of gonorrhea not conducive to peaceful, happy marriage?
24. How serious may gonorrhea become in the case of women and so how much of a price does
one pay for the immorality that infects one with gonorrhea?
25. (a) When does one that gives up single life do well? (b) Why does one, even if married, have
to be on guard these days?
26. What does Proverbs 5:15-23 say to married men and to single men who intend to marry?
27. (a) With what should a Christian not want to supplement his wife, and why not? (b) How could
any sneak errors of a Christian result, to show that such errors have caught up with him?
28. Through consequent pain, what may he be brought to realize concerning the woman with
whom he committed immorality?
29. (a) Besides physical pain, what does the immorally erring Christian bring into his married life?
(b) Into what way does he bring himself, and to what denunciation does he become
subject?
30. (a) Because of dedication to God, what should we remember when immorality is opened up to
us uninvitedly? (b) What does Paul say in this regard to a Christian espoused to Christ?
31. To doing what with members of his spiritual body would Christ not consent, and what death-
dealing consequences may there be to sinning immorally against one’s own flesh?
32. Similarly, even if one is a dedicated person but not of Christ’s “body,” what should one think of
before committing immorality, and what does the New World society become obliged to do
toward the immoral?
33. For whom is this something to think about seriously, and in what way should we not want to
learn the consequences of immorality?
34. Hence what prayer of the psalmist do we feel moved to offer?

45
 Separation and Divorce for the Sake of Peace

THERE are innumerable cases of where dedicated, baptized believers have obeyed the
apostle Paul’s advice and have kept dwelling with unbelieving mates to have the joy of finally
‘saving’ the marriage mate. But what about a believer who uses God’s spirit to endure
persecution and opposition in the effort to hold the marriage together, but whose unbelieving
mate still finds it disagreeable and at length departs, either by living independently somewhere
else or by divorce or legal separation? Paul answers: “But if the unbelieving one proceeds to
depart, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not in servitude under such circumstances, but God
has called you to peace.”—1 Cor. 7:15.
2
In the interest of his own Christian peace, the believer may let the unbelieving marriage mate
depart and live elsewhere. The departed unbeliever may not remarry, any more than a departed
Christian believer may do so: “But if she should actually depart, let her remain single or else
make up again with her husband.” (1 Cor. 7:11) The abandoned believer has no Scripture
grounds for procuring a legal divorce, that is, on the mere basis of abandonment or of
incompatible difference of religion. Hence if he did get a divorce, he would not have the Scriptural
freedom to relieve himself of unsatisfying legal singleness by remarrying. Jesus Christ himself
says not, in the following words:
3
“Pharisees came up to him, intent on tempting him and saying: ‘Is it lawful for a man to
divorce his wife on every kind of grounds?’ In reply he said: ‘Did you not read that he who created
them at the beginning made them male and female and said: “For this reason a man will leave his
father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh”? So that they are no
longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together let no man put apart.’ They
said to him: Why, then, did Moses prescribe giving a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her?’
He said to them: ‘Moses, out of regard for your hardheartedness, made the concession to you of
divorcing your wives, but such has not been the case from the beginning. I say to you that
whoever divorces his wife except on the grounds of fornication and marries another commits
adultery.’”—Matt. 19:3-9; also Deuteronomy 24:1-4.
4
Thus Jesus did not say that divorce should be forbidden by the law of the State on any
ground, even on adultery. The religious priests of today who insist on such a law of no possible
divorce want to bind innocent marriage mates to adulterous partners. By such a law they shield
the adulterous mate and also encourage and promote marital unfaithfulness by allowing no relief
for the innocent mate. If they permitted the innocent mate to divorce the adulterous one, then it
would nullify the confessional forgiveness that the priests extend to the adulterous mate. In that
case the adulterous mate would not be shielded by the priest’s indulgence or remission of sins
toward the adulterous one who merely confesses but does not reform. The Scriptural way, the
most effective way, to reduce or prevent legal divorce is by teaching the Holy Scriptures and its
morality and keeping the Christian congregation free of adulterers, and not by a total antidivorce
law. Such a law has not stopped adultery.
5
God’s law under his new covenant, as stated by Jesus in his above-quoted words, certainly
allows for divorce on the proper basis. That one Scriptural or New Covenant basis is adultery.
Divorce on that basis frees the innocent mate to remarry without thus committing adultery himself
by remarriage. Divorce on any other basis does not free the legally separated ones to remarry
without becoming guilty of adultery in God’s eyes and so becoming unworthy of being in His
congregation under Christ. This is how Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount are to be
understood. He referred to the divorce law recorded by the prophet Moses in Deuteronomy 24:1
and went on to say: “You heard that it was said, ‘You must not commit adultery.’ . . . Moreover it
was said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ However, I say to
you that everyone divorcing his wife except on account of fornication makes her a subject for
adultery, seeing that whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”—Matt. 5:27-32.

46
 6
If a dedicated Christian divorces his wife for adultery, how does he thereby make her a
subject for adultery? She is already an adulteress by her own course and choice. It would not be
divorce that drives her into adultery. However, if the husband divorces his wife for any other
reasons, even reasons admitted by the law of the land, except for fornication or adultery, then he
does expose her to adultery in the future. How so? Because according to God’s law the
unadulterous wife is not disunited from her husband by such an unscriptural divorce. She is still
his wife and is thus not free to remarry and have sex relations with another legal husband.
7
Hence when Jesus says, “seeing that whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery,”
he does not mean any divorced woman at all. He means the woman legally divorced “except on
account of fornication”; that is, an unadulterous divorced woman. This same principle holds true
in the case of a husband whom his wife divorced although he had not acted adulterously. Any
woman marrying him would lead him into adultery and herself become a fornicatrix.
8
In Mark 10:11, 12 Jesus’ statement on divorce reads: “Whoever divorces his wife and
marries another commits adultery against her, and if ever a woman, after divorcing her husband,
marries another, she commits adultery.” Luke 16:18 reads similarly: “Everyone that divorces his
wife and marries another commits adultery, and he that marries a woman divorced from a
husband commits adultery.”
9
Those verses do not forbid divorce. But, taken by themselves, they would say that no
divorcee would be entitled to remarry, except after the death of the divorced mate; and that to
remarry during the lifetime of the divorced mate would mean to break God’s law against adultery.
However, those two versions of Jesus’ words on divorce are to be explained in the light of the
fuller statement recorded by the apostle Matthew, who shows that what Mark and Luke wrote on
divorce is true if the ground for procuring the divorce is anything else but adultery on the part of
the unfaithful mate. The single person who commits fornication with a harlotrous woman makes
himself “one body” with a woman not his wife. Likewise the adulterer makes himself one body, not
with his legal wife, but with the immoral person with whom he illegally lies. The adulterer thus sins
against his own flesh. Yes, not only against his own personal flesh but also against his legal wife
who till then has been “one flesh” with him. (1 Cor. 6:16, 17) For that reason, adultery really
breaks the marriage union. This is why divorce on the basis of adultery formally and finally
dissolves the legal marriage union. It frees the innocent partner to remarry with honor and with no
stain on good morality during the lifetime of the guilty divorced mate.
10
Divorcing an adulterous mate does not expose the divorced wrongdoer to adultery. Rather,
the legal marriage, as long as it lasted, had failed to protect the unfaithful one from immorality. So
the one marrying the adulterous divorcee merely marries an unclean person with an immoral
record; and this remarriage does not cause the adulterous divorcee to become adulterous for the
first time. If the innocent marriage mate divorces the adulterous mate, it frees the innocent one to
remarry. The Scriptural divorcer is not divorcing merely to get rid of an adulterous mate no longer
loved or physically safe to live with and have intercourse with. Such a divorcer is really freeing
himself for remarriage, if that becomes advisable, due to the need for a faithful, dedicated life
partner. By divorcing the adulterous mate, the divorcer simply lets the adulterous one have the
kind of life desired, an immoral life.
JUDGMENT AGAINST IMMORAL ONES
11
The committing of adultery can work disaster to the legal marriage tie through a resultant
divorce. But it certainly works disaster to one’s relationship to God, who has now come to his
spiritual temple with his judicial Messenger Jesus Christ to do judging. He warns: “‘I will come
near to you people for the judgment, and I will become a speedy witness against the sorcerers,
and against the adulterers, . . . while they have not feared me,’ Jehovah of armies has said.”—
Mal. 3:1, 5; also Hebrews 13:4.
12
This divine judgment would be expressed in casting out, disfellowshiping the adulterous one
from the congregation. To the congregation the judicial decision is handed down: “Quit mixing in
company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator . . . , not even eating with such a
man. . . . ‘Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.’” (1 Cor. 5:11-13) Outside of God’s

47
moral organization there is no everlasting life. Hence the dismissing of the fornicator and the
adulterer could be the initial judgment act that points the way to everlasting destruction of the
guilty one unless he shows unhypocritical heartfelt repentance toward God and reforms with a
sincere resolve to keep morally clean and not contaminate God’s congregation and not bring
reproach upon it. Then God would authorize his congregation to reinstate the repentant, reformed
sinner, subjecting him to a period of probation until he puts himself back in the confidence of the
clean congregation.
13
If the adulterous marriage partner makes confession and shows an honest repentance and
a resolve to be true and faithful to the marriage vow henceforth and then implores forgiveness,
the innocent mate may choose to forgive and to resume marriage relations and not divorce the
adulterous one. Under certain circumstances this not only preserves the marriage bond but also
keeps the innocent mate from having to live, eat and sleep with a disfellowshiped mate; which
would be a spiritually difficult situation. How?
14
Immorality affects the privileges one may enjoy in the congregation. For this reason the
adulterous mate should also confess to the representatives of the congregation. These
responsible servants of the congregation may take into consideration the repentance and sorrow
of the guilty one and whether it was the first offense, and they could mercifully respect the
innocent mate’s forgiveness of the repentant, converting mate; and in order to preserve the
spiritual oneness of the married couple, they would not disfellowship the adulterous one. They
would hold the innocent mate responsible to enforce a probation upon the forgiven sinner long
enough to prove the recovery of the sinner to good morals, and they would check on the guilty
one monthly for a full year to help in the reformation. However, if the sinner has been holding any
responsible offices and service assignments in the congregation, then the congregation’s
representative committee must arrange to divest the sinner of such offices or assignments. Why?
Because, according to the Scriptural qualifications for holding a position of responsibility and
special service in the congregation, the holder has to be exemplary, irreprehensible, clean in
conscience, above reproach from the Devil’s agents. (1 Tim. 3:1-9; Titus 1:5-9) Hence, even
though the converting adulterous one has been forgiven by the innocent marriage partner and by
the congregation’s representative committee, he must be held unfit for office or special service.
15
In many cases an innocent mate’s forgiveness may prove to be only limited in its power to
relieve the adulterous one of all the serious consequences of the immorality. If the immoral mate
committed adultery with a person outside the congregation such as a fornicator or a harlot, no
congregation action would need to be taken toward the immoral outsider. There would be no
need to ask forgiveness of the outside fornicator or harlot or to straighten out matters with such
an immoral outsider. But if one carried on the sexual uncleanness inside one’s own congregation
or another Christian congregation, then the innocent mate’s forgiveness may not be sufficient to
ward off a disfellowshipment.
16
Say the adultery was committed with the husband or with the wife of another couple in the
same congregation or another congregation, or with a minor person under parental care or under
a guardian. Then others who are seriously affected by the moral offense would come into the
picture. The husband whose wife was violated, or the wife whose husband sinned with another’s
wife, or the parents whose child was corrupted—do they forgive? Or do they want disciplinary
action to be taken against the immoral married person? The innocent marriage mate may forgive
for private personal reasons, but that mate cannot forgive for these others who have been hurt.
Such personal, domestic forgiveness does not settle outside accounts for the guilty one. It cannot
squash outside demands for disciplinary action by the congregation or demands for reparation
through legal action outside in the courts of the land. The congregation may therefore decide to
disfellowship despite the innocent mate’s personal forgiveness to the wrongdoer.
17
The congregation committee has to consider, also, the enormity of the offense. How
widespread was it? Were other congregations concerned, and was the purity of their local
organization defiled? Say, for example, a married man made regular trips to a number of
congregations and in all these or in some of them he made improper advances to single women
or to wives—wherever he could find some willing or yielding sister. He is making a general

48
practice of immorality, and that within God’s holy congregation. He is defiling God’s organization
in its several congregations. He is abusing what responsible office he may hold respecting those
congregations. Under cover of official service he is slipping in merely to satisfy his perverted
cravings. He cows weak, timid sisters into yielding to his unclean designs. Privately he prays to
God to forgive him, but he makes no real effort to control himself and correct himself. So he
keeps on sinning, under the misimpression that God’s loving-kindness through Christ will cancel
the sins that he enjoys committing, without regard for the purity and name of God’s congregation.
18
Such a man proves himself to be one of those spoken of in Jude 4: “Certain men have
slipped in who have long ago been appointed by the Scriptures to the judgment described below,
ungodly men, turning the undeserved kindness of our God into an excuse for loose conduct and
proving false to our only Owner and Lord, Jesus Christ.”
19
In God’s time this responsible traveling man is found out and exposed. His wife forgives him
when he admits his wrong. But is her forgiveness of any avail? No! It is no shield for him from
deserved consequences. He cannot transform himself overnight. His forced admission of guilt
and his expressing of regret does not mean any real reformation. He is a danger in the midst of
the congregations of God’s dedicated people, a powerful bit of leaven that can ferment the whole
mass. He is a deliberate, confirmed defiler of what is holy. He is untrustworthy, a risk, an unfit
man to have among us. According to Bible principles he must be disfellowshiped. God’s
congregation must be cleansed and safeguarded, even though his wife forgives and does not
divorce him.
20
But what of the adult single person who commits fornication and has no mate to whom to
confess his transgression? When sad and cut to the heart on account of his wrongdoing, can he
go to someone to help him? The congregation service committee of spiritually qualified brothers
serve the whole congregation. If a single person is overtaken in a violation of Jehovah’s law, he
may confess his guilt to the committee. The committee must then decide what disciplinary action
shall be followed in each case, whether disfellowshiping or probation. They have the
responsibility for the welfare of the congregation and each member in it and must determine what
is in the best interests of the congregation. If they find the single person has been overtaken in a
hasty act, his first offense, and his attitude shows true sorrow and repentance, they are within
bounds of their duties before Jehovah to extend mercy, just as they can in the case of a married
transgressor, and to set a period of probation during which the offender would report to them
regularly on his conduct and efforts at reformation. If he were a servant, of course, he would have
to resign his office as one no longer irreprehensible.
PURSUIT OF PEACE BY THE MARRIED
21
During the service year of 1958-1959 there were 6,552 individuals disfellowshiped by the
New World society of Jehovah’s witnesses for various reasons. Many of these were cases of
immorality, either fornication or adultery. Where it became proper and timely, mercy was
displayed, and there were 1,597 of all disfellowshiped during past years reinstated during the
1958-1959 service year upon proof of godly sorrow, repentance and reformation. These were put
on probation for a reasonable period of time, before being granted again the general privileges of
all in the congregation. So, at the end of the said service year there were, out of all those who
had been disfellowshiped during recent years, a total of 25,143 still cut off from the congregation
of Jehovah’s people. While it is too bad that any should make it necessary to disfellowship them,
we are comforted to know that, out of all the hundreds of thousands who are reporting preaching
activities throughout the earth, only .81 percent were disfellowshiped. That is only eight-tenths of
one percent. Still even that low figure is a warning to each one of us.
22
Disfellowshiping removes a person from peaceful relations with Jehovah God. Married
Christians should avoid with dread such a wrecking of peace with God. God has called married
Christians to peace. (1 Cor. 7:15) In their married state let them jealously guard their peace with
him. That means guarding, as far as possible, their domestic peace as between husband and
wife. To this end let them lead lives faithful to God and his Christ and faithful to their marriage
mates with whom they are “one flesh.”

49
 23
On the other side of the universal war of Armageddon, now not so far away, there lies the
restored earthly Paradise. But even at the present time since the year 1919 the great Planter and
Cultivator Jehovah God has brought his dedicated witnesses on earth into a spiritual Paradise.
There they enjoy peace, joy, and all the other fruitage of the holy spirit, and they bring forth all the
fruitage of good works in preaching the good news of the Kingdom world-wide. In this spiritual
Paradise, just as originally in the garden of Eden when occupied by the perfect Adam and Eve,
there is no room for polygamy or improper marriage conduct or disregard for the theocratic
relationship of man and wife. May married believers appreciate the situation and take the
opportunity to work for the salvation of the beloved marriage mate. By their marriage conduct may
they honor God. Great will be their reward. Their marriage will serve his purpose and play its part
in vindicating him for lovingly providing this dignified, honorable peaceful union of husband and
wife.
[Study Questions]
1. If, in spite of all, the unbeliever chooses to leave and live separate, what should the believing
mate do about it?
2. If a separation does occur, is there a Scriptural ground for divorce, to be followed by
remarriage to another?
3. What did Jesus say on the matter, according to Matthew 19:3-9?
4. Do Jesus’ words support the passing of a total antidivorce law, and what is the most effective
way to reduce or prevent legal divorce cases?
5. What divorce rests upon a Scriptural basis, and what privilege does it allow the innocent
divorcee?
6. Do both Scriptural and unscriptural divorce make a woman a subject for adultery, or what
difference, if any, is there?
7. Which kind of divorcee, then, did Jesus mean when saying that whoever marries a divorced
woman commits adultery?
8, 9. (a) Taken by themselves, what would the statements by Mark and by Luke mean for all
divorcees? (b) In harmony with what are the statements by Mark and Luke to be explained,
and why does adultery really break a marriage union and open the way for Scriptural
divorce?
10. What does divorcing an adulterous mate free that one for and also free the innocent mate for?
11. Besides to legal marriage, to what more serious thing can adultery work disaster, especially
since Jehovah has come to his temple?
12. What is the judicial decision handed down concerning such an immoral person, and what is
the only way by which the immoral one could be saved from everlasting destruction?
13, 14. (a) Where a mate commits adultery, how may the marriage bond be preserved and the
couple keep living together? (b) By what action may the congregation keep the innocent,
forgiving mate from having to live with a disfellowshiped mate? (c) Though the adulterous
one may be forgiven, what must happen to any responsible office or services that he may
hold in the congregation, and why?
15. In what situation would an innocent mate’s forgiveness not ward off disfellowshipment?
16. In case a member committed adultery inside his congregation or another congregation, why
might the offender’s congregation have to disfellowship despite the innocent mate’s
forgiveness?
17, 18. (a) For example, how might a traveling man, with an official capacity, visit and corrupt a
number of yielding women in such outside congregations, and also pray under a
misimpression? (b) How did Jude describe such a man?

50
19. Why must such a man be disfellowshiped, even though his wife does forgive him and not
divorce him?
20. When an unmarried adult fornicator wishes to confess his sin, to whom shall he go, and how
will he be dealt with by the congregation?
21. (a) During the 1958-1959 service year how many were disfellowshiped from the New World
society? How many were reinstated? How many remained disfellowshiped? (b) Is the
smallness of the percentage of disfellowshiped ones to be ignored?
22. To what have married Christians been called, and how should they guard this?
23. (a) Why, especially now, is there no room for wrong marriage conduct any more than back in
Eden? (b) What, then, should married Christians do to vindicate the Provider of marriage
for man and woman?

Marriage Obligations and Divorce

“That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife
and they must become one flesh.”—Gen. 2:24, NW.

FOR his followers Jesus Christ put marriage back where God had started it in the garden of
Eden. God gave the perfect man Adam one wife, making him monogamous. The Christian that is
justified or declared righteous in God’s sight may have no more than one living wife. In the
congregation the overseers, who are spiritually “older men,” and the ministerial servants may be
“husbands of one wife” only. They are the men to be followed as examples of the flock, and so all
other married persons in the flock may have only one living marriage mate. (1 Tim. 3:1, 2, 12,
NW; Titus 1:5-7) Christians must stick to their marriage mates in faithfulness, in love, so
remaining in it associated with God.
2
This does not permit a man to commit adultery or have sex relations with any other woman.
He should be satisfied with and draw delight from sexual relations with only his wife; as it is
written: “Drink water from your own cistern, running water from your own well. Why should your
springs be scattered abroad, your streams of water in the streets? Let them be for yourself alone,
and not for strangers along with you. Let your fountain be blessed to you, and get your enjoyment
from the wife of your youth. A lovely hind, a graceful doe—let her breasts intoxicate you always,
with her love be continually ravished. Why, my son, should you be ravished with the wife of
another, and embrace the bosom of an adulteress?” (Prov. 5:15-20, AT) Committing adultery
makes the guilty one subject to disfellowshiping from the New World society.
3
God created the sexes particularly for the peopling of the earth by bringing forth children.
(Gen. 1:27, 28) In his law to Israel God provided that a wife should have from her husband “her
sustenance, her clothing and her marriage due,” undiminished. This means she has the right to
have children if she wants them. (Ex. 21:10, 11, NW) This was shown by God’s law of brother-in-
law marriage, whereby the brother-in-law was obliged to marry the widow in order to give her a
child and thus raise up the name of his dead brother and not leave his brother’s widow childless.
(Deut. 25:5-10) A man was also entitled to have children by his wife. That is why, when the call to
the army of Israel came to him, if he was simply engaged to marry a girl he could not be drafted
till after the engagement was over and he was fully married. Even then he could not be drafted
until he had lived a year with her as a married man and had the opportunity to have a child by his
wife and see and enjoy it. (Deut. 20:1-5, 7; 24:5) The wife’s claim on the man preceded that of the
army, for her sake and for the sake of the family name. He must give her the “marriage due.” She
must give him his due.

51
 4
After the great flood Jehovah God repeated to Noah and his family the mandate to have
children. But there is now no procreation mandate laid upon Christians. Otherwise, no Christian
should remain single and childless. So no Christian obligation exists now before the battle of
Armageddon to have children. To keep as free as possible for the direct service of God in
preaching the good news of his kingdom, some Christian couples may choose to remain
childless, thereby avoiding parental obligations and keeping unburdened. If there were now in
force a procreation mandate from God, all married members of the New World society would
choose to have children immediately, and not delay it till after Armageddon, if possible. Although
under the original procreation mandate from God Adam and Eve did not have any children in the
garden of Eden for what time they were there. It was not for their failing to conceive children at
once that they were driven out. No married couple should be criticized for refusing or failing to
have children now before Armageddon.
5
This is not saying that married couples should not give each other the sexual due. This is not
saying that, before getting married, they should make an agreement and enter a common vow
before God to live a celibate life even after marriage, having no sexual relations but merely
enjoying each other’s companionship. No one should think that this is raising marriage to a
spiritual level and keeping it on an exalted, unfleshly plane, and so belittling the marriage of
others who have sexual relations. If a married couple does not want to pay marriage dues, then
the man and woman should not marry at all and not subject the mate to deprivation of what is
natural and craved naturally. By celibacy they are not putting their marriage on a level higher and
holier than that of others. They cannot change God’s honorable sexual arrangement. Celibate
marriages have therefore never fared well.
6
The others are not degrading their married life by intercourse, but are following an honorable,
rightful course. There is no proper marriage for so-called “Platonic friendship” just because the
end of the world is so near. If an engaged couple think natural connections are carnal, then why
wed at all? Why have one of the opposite sex so close to one all the time, in the most intimate
privacy? If it is not good or spiritually upbuilding to touch a woman, why live so intimate with her
even in celibate marriage? Be natural, be normal, do not be falsely idealistic. Do not be like some
Irish Catholic girls who are in the news, who get married but refuse to give their husband his due
because they want to imitate Jesus’ mother Mary and remain “ever virgin.” The apostle Peter
instructed them never to handle their married life that way, but to recognize their husband as their
“lord.” (1 Pet. 3:5, 6) The apostle Paul, who at least once set the apostle Peter straight, wrote:
7
“Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is well for a man not to have
intercourse with a woman; yet, because of prevalence of fornication, let each man have his own
wife and each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife her due; but let
the wife also do likewise to her husband. The wife does not exercise authority over her own body,
but her husband does; likewise, also, the husband does not exercise authority over his own body,
but his wife does. Do not be depriving each other of it, except by mutual consent for an appointed
time, that you may devote time to prayer and may come together again, that Satan may not keep
tempting you for your lack of self-regulation. However, I say this by way of concession, not in the
way of an order.”—1 Cor. 7:1-7, NW.
8
The everlasting life of a married person depends upon his faithfulness to his marriage
contract. Jehovah, accompanied by his Messenger of the covenant, is now at his spiritual
Christian temple and warns that he has come near to judgment and will be a swift witness against
adulterers. (Mal. 3:1, 2, 5, Da) The apostle Peter says that a Christian husband should treat his
wife understandingly and as a fellow runner in the race for everlasting life in the new world. His
words are: “You husbands, continue dwelling in like manner with them according to knowledge,
assigning them honor as to a weaker vessel, the feminine one, since you are also heirs with them
of the undeserved favor of life, in order for your prayers not to be hindered.” (1 Pet. 3:7, NW) A
Christian will therefore not abuse his wife either physically or spiritually. If he does not help his
wife and children to gain life in the new world, how could he be expected to help outsiders to do
so?

52
 9
Jesus Christ loves his “bride,” who is to be his “wife.” His married followers must also love
their wives. “Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation
and delivered up himself for it, . . . let each one of you individually so love his wife as he does
himself; on the other hand, the wife should have deep respect for her husband.” (Eph. 5:25, 33,
NW) To some former pagans the command to love one’s wife may sound strange, but a Christian
is under orders to do so. He should love her by deeds as well as words, being concerned “how he
may gain the approval of his wife” as far as he conscientiously can. (1 Cor. 7:33, NW) He should
sit with her in congregational meetings, he should study the Bible at home together with her and
build up a oneness of spiritual interests with her. This may be difficult at first or unusual.
10
But as a husband begins showing love in little ways of expressing it and notes the pleasure
of his wife over it he will find that he likes it. He will want to do it some more and to enlarge it. It
will become normal, natural for him to do so. He will grow in appreciation that this is a showing of
the spirit of God, the fruitage of which is love. In turn, let no wife reproach her husband, saying:
“You don’t love me. You never show it.” Let her notice his little, embarrassed ways of showing
love for her and then let her reveal sincere pleasure at this and also voice appreciation of this, to
enhance his happiness. The common possession of the truth and the likeness of their dedications
to God and their hope of gaining life together everlastingly in the new world ought to provoke a
sympathy and love between them. This will help so much amid the difficulties of married life
today.
11
Let the wife show deep respect for her husband, acknowledging him as her married head.
(1 Cor. 11:3) “Let wives be in subjection to their husbands as to the Lord, because a husband is
head of his wife as the Christ also is head of the congregation, he being a savior of this body. In
fact, as the congregation is in subjection to the Christ, so let wives also be to their husbands in
everything.” (Eph. 5:21-24, NW; also Titus 2:3-5) Besides this example of the Christian
congregation toward Jesus Christ, the Christian wife has the still loftier example of the subjection
and obedience of the universal organization of God toward the Lord Jehovah. (Isa. 54:5, AS) It is
interesting for a wife to note the recommendations of March 20, 1956, of Great Britain’s third
Royal Commission on Marriage and Divorce. Among the factors that it listed as contributing to the
rising divorce rate in Britain was “the new position of women as equals rather than inferiors in
marriage partnerships.” It is only reasonable to expect that the ignoring of God’s all-wise
arrangement for human marriage would lead to trouble and the wrecking of more and more
marriages. The purpose of all the advice of God’s Word to married couples is, not only to guide
them in making their life together more enjoyable and helpful toward gaining eternal life, but also
to keep them living together, to help them avoid divorce.—New York Times, March 21, 1956.
DISSOLUTION GROUNDS: LEGAL AND SCRIPTURAL
12
By the laws of states and nations today divorce is granted on a number of grounds. Persons
who have lost or killed their love for their marriage mate try to grab hold of whatever legal
grounds they can to break the marriage tie, such as mental cruelty, laziness, refusal of conjugal
rights, drunkenness, insanity, incurable disease, desertion or abandonment, barrenness, sodomy,
bestiality, criminality, incompatibility, change of one’s religion, and so on, besides adultery. But
are all these legal grounds Scripturally right, valid for the Christian? Jesus Christ is Jehovah’s
Counselor for us. The Jewish Pharisees once tested him with this question: “Is it lawful for a man
to divorce his wife on every kind of grounds?” Jesus did not answer those questioners by
referring to the Roman Caesar’s laws concerning divorce. He referred to the superior law of the
Most High God and showed there is but one ground for divorce—adultery or moral unfaithfulness.
13
“In reply he said: ‘Did you not read that he who created them at the beginning made them
male and female and said: “For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will
stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh”? So that they are no longer two, but one flesh.
Therefore, what God has yoked together let no man put apart.’ They said to him: ‘Why, then, did
Moses prescribe giving a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her?’ He said to them: ‘Moses, out
of regard for your hardheartedness, made the concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such
has not been the case from the beginning. I say to you that whoever divorces his wife except on
the grounds of fornication and marries another commits adultery.’” (Matt. 19:3-9, NW) “When

53
again in the house the disciples began to question him concerning this. And he said to them:
‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, and if ever a
woman, after divorcing her husband, marries another, she commits adultery.’” (Mark 10:10-12,
NW) “Everyone that divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he that marries
a woman divorced from a husband commits adultery.”—Luke 16:18, NW.
14
Adultery is unloving and is a breaking of God’s commandment. (Rom. 13:8-10; Ex. 20:14;
Acts 21:25) The adulterer is already married and yoked together as one flesh with his legal mate.
But adultery is a putting apart what God has yoked together. The adulterer pulls away from his
legal mate and makes himself one flesh with a third person. Three do not make one flesh, but two
do become one flesh. A person’s being one flesh must be with only one other, not with two others
or more. Addressing himself to anointed Christians who were members of Christ’s spiritual body
or congregation, the apostle Paul wrote: “Do you not know that your bodies are members of
Christ? Shall I, then, take the members of the Christ away and make them members of a harlot?
Never may that happen! What! Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body?
For, ‘The two,’ says he, ‘will be one flesh.’ But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Flee from
fornication. Every other sin which a man may commit is outside his body, but he that practices
fornication is sinning against his own body. What! Do you not know that the body of you people is
the temple of the holy spirit within you which you have from God?”—1 Cor. 6:15-19, NW.
15
Many of those here addressed were married persons. Having sexual connection with their
married mates was not taking them away from membership in Christ’s body, for one’s wife is
one’s own flesh and one is uniting with what is one’s own. But when married Christians commit
adultery or single Christians commit fornication, even with a religious temple prostitute, they do
something of which God and Christ do not approve. They are taking their bodies that belong to
Christ and becoming one flesh with a sinner, a fornicator or a harlot. When committing adultery or
fornicating, a Christian sins against his own body. He is misusing it, contrary to his owner Christ.
The adulterous Christian also sins against his wife, who is properly one flesh with him. He is
breaking his unity with her, thus hurting himself, hating himself because he hates his wife whose
flesh he rejects. An anointed Christian cannot take himself as a member of Christ’s body and
make himself “one flesh” with an illegal person, a fornicator or a fornicatrix, a harlot, for Jesus has
no connection or oneness with such an unclean person. Unless the Christian repents and reforms
from his immoral course he shows he prefers union, not with Christ, but with the immoral person,
and hence he ceases to be in union with Christ. He is not one in spirit with Christ. He ceases to
be part of the virgin class that is espoused to Christ. A confirmed adulterer or fornicator is no
Christian. He is no witness of Jehovah. Jehovah God does not make adulterers or fornicators his
witnesses.—1 Cor. 5:11-13.
16
Since this uniting sexually with an illegal person makes a married person one flesh with
someone outside the marriage union, it is only adultery that really breaks the marriage union,
snapping the yoke with which God has made the married couple one flesh. Therefore Jesus said
that only adultery is the ground that God allows for divorce. Unless adultery has broken the yoke
of marriage, a divorce would not be proper or would not really take effect before God. Divorce
courts of this world, when decreeing a divorce on grounds other than adultery, are not actually
putting apart what God has bound together. The divorced persons are still one flesh with each
other, still man and wife. Thus neither one is free to remarry, for to remarry would mean to
commit adultery. A man who divorces his wife on unadulterous grounds exposes her to adultery
by a remarriage and also exposes himself in a like way. A man who marries a woman not
divorced for adultery by herself or by her husband commits adultery with her, uniting himself with
flesh that still belongs to another man.
17
Death dissolves a marriage. A widower or widow is therefore free to remarry. “A married
woman is bound by law to her husband while he is alive; but if her husband dies, she is
discharged from the law of her husband. So, then, while her husband is living, she would be
styled an adulteress if she became another man’s. But if her husband dies, she is free from his
law, so that she is not an adulteress if she becomes another man’s.” (Rom. 7:2, 3, NW) One’s
husband or wife may be known to be dead through war or a catastrophe but may not happen to
be registered as dead or the records may not be at hand to verify the death. Or one’s marriage

54
mate may disappear and be absent so long that the law of the land pronounces him dead. By this
a person is legally declared a widower or widow. Such a one may conscientiously remarry. By
remarrying he takes upon himself the responsibility for the outcome, and he must live in full
submission to the new obligations. God knows the actual facts and he judges in accordance with
them, and he determines whether the remarried person is suitable for life in the new world or not.
If a mate legally declared dead should put in appearance again and want his legal mate restored
to him, the matter would have to be straightened out legally. Under such circumstances anyone
marrying a person only legally declared a widower or widow is taking a risk or chance and must
be willing to face any turn of events.
IMPOTENCE, UNCLEANNESS, INSANITY, CHANGE OF RELIGION
18
The Rabbinical law of the Jews laid emphasis on the duty of the marital act. It allowed the
wife to divorce her husband who, because of his physical disability, was unable to give her this
due for a period of six months. Likewise a husband could divorce his wife because of her inability
to produce children. But mere impotence on the husband’s part Jesus did not recognize as a
ground for divorce. The wedding procedure that has legally been carried out before witnesses
made the marriage both binding and valid, just as it did for Adam and Eve in Eden. Where a man
is impotent today the married couple in their desire for children might agree for the wife to receive
the seed of another man by artificial insemination. Some law courts have already held that
artificial insemination is adultery and that children produced by such means are illegitimate. The
recent British Royal Commission on Marriage and Divorce recommended as a ground for divorce
the wife’s acceptance of artificial insemination by a donor of seed without her husband’s consent.
Such a divorce would be Scriptural. But where the husband consented it would be grounds for the
disfellowshiping of both man and wife. Why? Because it is a virtual committing of adultery, and
both man and wife consented to the immoral act. The husband in effect gave her to another man
to receive the seed of copulation, and the wife gave herself to a man not her husband to become
the mother of a child by that other man with whom she was not one flesh. It is an adulterous
course, and the fact that the husband adopts the child does not do away with the fact that he
consented to the adulterous use of his wife.—Lev. 15:16-18, 32, 33; 19:20; Num. 5:12, 13, NW.
19
Neither is a wife’s barrenness a true ground for divorce. Because of her barrenness for
many years, even up to more than twenty-five years, Abraham did not divorce Sarah, nor Isaac
Rebekah, nor Jacob Rachel, nor the priest Zechariah Elizabeth. The sons of Noah did not divorce
their wives for barrenness during all the years that the ark was under construction and until two
years after the flood. (Gen. 6:18; 11:10) Nor did Jehovah divorce his “woman,” his universal
organization, because of her barrenness or failure to bring forth the Messiah for more than four
thousand years.—Isa. 54:1-13.
20
Sodomy (or the unnatural intercourse of one male with another male as with a female),
Lesbianism (or the homosexual relations between women), and bestiality (or the unnatural sexual
relations by man or woman with an animal) are not Scriptural grounds for divorce. They are filthy,
they are unclean, and God’s law to Israel condemned to death those committing such misdeeds,
thus drastically putting these out of God’s congregation. But such acts are not adultery with the
opposite sex, making the unclean person one flesh with another of the opposite sex. (Rom. 1:26-
32) Yet there is a penalty of disfellowshiping attached to them. They will keep a Christian out of
the heavenly kingdom and out of God’s new world, and that means being destroyed like beasts
from all future life. “The minding of the flesh means death,” it “means enmity with God, for it is not
under subjection to the law of God, nor, in fact, can it be. So those who are in harmony with the
flesh cannot please God.” They cannot gain the prize of everlasting life from him. (Rom. 8:6-8;
1 Cor. 6:9, 10; Gal. 5:19-21) Such filthy things by a mate may make life unbearable for the clean
married person and are grounds for separation only, though some courts grant a divorce on such
grounds. Such separation does not free one to remarry and enter thus into adultery. Writes Paul:
“To the married people I give instructions, yet not I but the Lord, that a wife should not depart
from her husband; but if she should actually depart, let her remain single or else make up again
with her husband; and a husband should not leave his wife.” (1 Cor. 7:10, 11, NW) Only if one of
the separated couple committed adultery under the stress of the separation would there be
Scriptural basis for the innocent to procure a divorce and be free to remarry.

55
 21
Should one’s marriage mate in the course of time go insane or contract an incurable
disease or a loathsome one, this is no true basis for getting a divorce. In this case the unfortunate
mate must be treated just as an injured member of one’s body or as one’s child by one’s mate.
The mate should be treated with proper care, not be cut off from relationship by legal divorce.
Despite the ailment the sick mate remains one flesh with the healthy one and deserves full
attention and faithfulness as his own flesh. This displays love for one’s flesh and helps to lighten
the terrible situation, rather than worsen it. “In this way husbands ought to be loving their wives as
their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself, for no man ever hated his own flesh, but
he feeds and cherishes it, as the Christ also does the congregation, because we are members of
his body. ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will stick to his wife, and the
two will be one flesh.’” (Eph. 5:28-31, NW) The faithful mate will not forsake the other during
illness either mental or physical. By God’s law the healthy one is not freed to do so. Naaman’s
wife was not freed from him because he was a leper whose terrible disease only a miracle of
Almighty God could cure. (2 Ki. 5:1-4, 8-14) At a wedding the mates usually vow to take each
other for better or for worse.
22
Some law courts take as a ground for divorce the change in religion on the part of one’s
mate. According to God and Christ this is not right. This law case assumes that, at marriage, both
the husband and the wife were members of the same religious system, so that now the one’s
change of religion creates a home difficulty on a most vital point. By adopting the new religion the
one changing becomes an unbeliever toward the religion of the other mate. Though this may be a
bitter experience for the mate that retains the former religion it is no real reason for him to
separate from the other either by legal action or by mutual consent. On this Paul writes:
23
“If any brother has an unbelieving wife, and yet she is agreeable to dwelling with him, let him
not leave her; and a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and yet he is agreeable to dwelling
with her, let her not leave her husband. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to his
wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the brother; otherwise, your children
would really be unclean, but now they are holy. But if the unbelieving one proceeds to depart, let
him depart; a brother or a sister is not in servitude under such circumstances, but God has called
you to peace. For, wife, how do you know but that you will save your husband? Or, husband, how
do you know but that you will save your wife?”—1 Cor. 7:12-16, NW.
24
So difference of religion, either from before marriage or only since getting married, is no
reason why a couple should separate. It is no basis for a divorce that would free them to marry
others. If the husband should believe and come into God’s truth before his wife does, he should
stick to his wife if his change of religion makes no difference with her or even if she objects. The
thing is, Does she want to continue living with him under the circumstances, which his accepting
the truth should really make better circumstances? If she does, then he should not leave her. His
staying with her gives him the opportunity to talk the truth to her, or at least live the truth before
her, and possibly by this course help her to accept the truth and get salvation to life in God’s new
world. This opportunity holds true also for the wife who believes the truth and still remains with
her husband.
25
Since the unbelieving one is still “one flesh” with the believer, the unbeliever for this reason
alone gains some recognition from Jehovah God. God considers their children, not as unclean,
but as holy, and the believer will try to bring them up in true holiness that, at the age of
understanding, they too might of their own choice dedicate themselves to God through Christ.
The unbeliever is not automatically made a saint or one of God’s holy ones, but the believing
mate has dedicated everything to God and treats the unbeliever from that standpoint. The
sanctified believer will accordingly treat the unbeliever as God would want it to be done, and that
will be all toward aiding the unbeliever to see and accept the truth and also come into relationship
with God.
26
If the unbeliever does not respond to this sanctified treatment, there is still no reason to
leave such one. The move toward separation must or should be taken by the unbeliever. In some
cases this move may be a virtual abandonment by the unbeliever’s mistreating the believer so
badly that it is practically unbearable to live together further. But, as in the case where even fellow

56
believers might separate from each other over some disagreement, the believer must remain
single until the departed unbeliever commits immorality and so provides grounds for proper
divorce. (1 Cor. 7:10, 11) The believer’s attitude toward the separated mate may be like that
expressed in Laban’s words to Jacob against any violation of the marriage alliance: “Let Jehovah
keep watch between me and you when we are situated unseen the one from the other.” (Gen.
31:49, NW) Jehovah God watches whether there is any violating of the marriage covenant. He
observes who is the guilty mate and determines whether there is Scriptural ground for divorce to
free one for remarriage. This must be, not so-called “spiritual adultery,” but physical adultery.
27
The inspired James did write: “Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the
world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting
himself an enemy of God.” (Jas. 4:4, NW) But this spiritually adulterous friendship with the world
is no ground for divorce. Why not? Because this mere friendship does not make anybody “one
flesh” with one of the opposite sex adulterously. True, an unbeliever is a friend of this world.
However, the apostle Paul did not argue from this that a believer had the right and good cause to
leave the unbelieving mate. To the contrary, it was perfectly proper, and altogether moral, for
them to keep living together if the unbeliever was agreeable to this. By this keeping together as a
couple the unbeliever might be helped toward salvation in the new world, which help would not be
possible if the two were said to be improperly living together and the believer was therefore said
to be conniving at spiritual adultery by the worldling.
MERCIFUL TREATMENT OF A MATE
28
Christ limited the grounds for a divorce that frees one for remarriage to adultery. This does
not give either marriage mate the allowance to abuse or neglect the other. This limitation to
adultery only emphasizes the divine arrangement that the married couple are one flesh, and
should stick together in mutual care, come better or come worse. This is the decree of the
infallible Judge of the Supreme Marriage Court. In some lands the law does not make the
adulterous conduct of the husband a legal ground for the wife to divorce him, but makes only the
morally loose wife the one that can be divorced for adultery. But according to God’s ruling through
Christ, if the husband is immoral, it allows a woman to put him away legally and free herself for
remarriage without becoming an adulteress by this action. That is why Jesus said: “Whoever
divorces his wife [unscripturally] and marries another commits adultery against her, and if ever a
woman, after divorcing her husband, marries another, she commits adultery.” (Mark 10:11, 12,
NW) So Jesus was not setting up for husbands a standard different from that for wives when he
said in his sermon on the mountain: “Moreover it was said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him
give her a certificate of divorce.’ However, I say to you that everyone divorcing his wife except on
account of fornication makes her a subject for adultery, seeing that whoever marries a divorced
woman commits adultery.” (Matt. 5:31, 32, NW) God is not partial. To him adultery by the
husband is just as bad as that by the wife.
29
So let no husband covet another man’s wife, nor look upon any other woman with desire to
have with her the relations that he owes exclusively to his wife. Let the proverbial married
business executive or office man beware that he does not fall in love with his lady secretary,
married or single, and take liberties with her. Jesus said: “You heard that it was said, ‘You must
not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone that keeps on looking at a woman so as to
have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matt. 5:27, 28, NW)
He is already guilty in the sight of God, who reads the heart. Although this is adultery in the man’s
heart and although he may not be divorced by his wife on this ground, covetousness toward
someone other than one’s marriage mate, if not blocked, leads to physical adultery.
30
If one’s mate does commit adultery one has the right to forgive and not sue for divorce,
provided the guilty one shows proper repentance and earnestly asks for forgiveness and
promises not to repeat but be faithful to the marriage vow. If the innocent one does not forgive the
offending mate, then the offender must be disfellowshiped by the congregation and the innocent
mate is authorized by the Scriptures to get a legal divorce if possible or desired. This is a private
matter. If, say, the husband forgives the wife, he continues to give her the marriage due, trusting
in God to forgive her. Then there is no reason for the wife, whom he treats as “one flesh” with

57
him, to be exposed and punished by the Christian congregation with disfellowshiping, thus
undoing the reunion that the husband’s forgiveness has mercifully brought about. “Hatred stirs up
strife, but love covers all offenses.” (Prov. 10:12, RS) “Have intense love for one another,
because love covers a multitude of sins.” (1 Pet. 4:8, NW) “My brothers, if anyone among you is
misled from the truth and another turns him back, know that he who turns a sinner back from the
error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.” (Jas. 5:19, 20,
NW) “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If
he listens to you [and admits his sin, expresses his sorrowful repentance and begs forgiveness],
you have gained your brother.” If the sinner refuses to listen to even the supervisory committee of
the Christian congregation of which the sinner is a member, he must be excommunicated, said
Jesus.—Matt. 18:15-17, 21, 22, NW.
31
If, in imitation of God and in obedience to Christ, the husband has forgiven his repentant
wife and held back from punishing her legally as he might, how has the congregation a right to
punish her with excommunication and to put a spiritual barrier between the husband and his wife,
whom he is trying to help reform? The congregation should co-operate in the reform effort. But,
what if, before the husband decides to forgive his wife, the congregation disfellowships her? If the
husband afterward forgives her for Scriptural reasons, this does not automatically lift the
excommunication of her from the congregation, for the matter is now directly in the congregation’s
hands. She must deal directly with the congregation’s supervisory committee and must satisfy it
by taking the necessary steps to be fully taken back into the congregation. (Compare paragraph
41, last fourteen lines.) A similar handling of the matter would take place if it was the faithful wife
that forgave the husband, not under any compulsion or insistence or threatening on his part, but
because of his unmistakable repentance and primarily with the loving desire to help recover her
husband spiritually. “The wife does not exercise authority over her own body, but her husband
does; likewise, also, the husband does not exercise authority over his own body, but his wife
does.” (1 Cor. 7:4, NW) Consequently, during the time that she was proving the sincerity and
thoroughness of his repentance and reform efforts, she would exercise a vigilance concerning his
conduct and help him to keep morally and spiritually clean, fit to be associated with the Christian
congregation.
32
In the case of a faithful husband, certainly he may be expected to put his wife on probation,
closely watching her and helping her to keep from repeating sin, and the congregation will rely
upon him to do so. Otherwise the congregation would consider him as not presiding properly over
his own household and hence not qualified to hold any responsible office with spiritual oversight
in the congregation. In that case, too, the congregation would step in, because he is not
conducting his home affairs in a Christian manner, and would take action against man and wife.
The person with whom the adultery was committed may be a member of the congregation. If so,
that person must be disfellowshiped and thus stripped of service privileges and positions and
Christian fellowship. If after disfellowshipment that one shows the fruitage of repentance and
seeks to get back into the congregation, that one may be reinstated and put on a long probation,
for at least a year, and then, being found on good behavior, he may be formally relieved of the
restrictions imposed upon him and be fully received back.—1 Cor. 5:1-5, 13; 2 Cor. 2:5-11.
33
When a congregation withholds an excommunication action because of the innocent mate’s
prior forgiveness, this does not mean that the guilty mate may not and should not be deprived of
any special responsibilities or service privileges in the congregation. Here, not excommunication,
but the qualifications for special service positions in the congregation are involved. The guilty
mate, by adultery, has misrepresented the congregation and disqualified himself and should not
be kept in any representative or responsible position. The innocent mate’s forgiveness does not
protect the guilty mate from the congregation’s power of action to remove the disqualified person
and to have in office persons above reproach and offering no stumblingblock to others.
34
The forgiveness of a guilty mate calls to mind the prophet Hosea, whom Jehovah instructed
to take his adulterous wife back and who obediently did so. (Hos. 1:3-6; 3:1, 2) Long before that,
in the days of Israel’s judges, an unnamed Levite journeyed a distance and took his adulterous
concubine back, but not to prostitute her. At the Benjaminite city of Gibeah he turned her loose to
the mob that stormed the house where he was lodging. But he did not put her at the mob’s mercy

58
because he failed to love her. He did so only to prevent his sacred office as a Levite from being
profaned by forced sodomy or effeminacy. He did not approve of the mob’s violation of his wife or
concubine. Indignantly he made it an issue that he put before the whole nation of Israel. He
provoked the shocked eleven tribes of Israel to punish the guilty city and the tribe of Benjamin by
a war that almost brought the wiping out of the guilty tribe. This vindicated the other eleven
brother tribes as being upholders of the purity of the nation.—Judges, chapters 19 and 20.
35
In the adultery case handled by the apostle Paul, at 1 Corinthians 5:1-13, Paul ordered only
the man guilty of fornication put out of the congregation as a leavenlike poisonous influence. If the
woman was a member of the congregation, why did not Paul, with his apostolic authority, also
order the congregation to disfellowship the equally guilty woman in the case? She was the wife of
the guilty man’s father, and the apostle Paul would respect the treatment that the husband might
extend his guilty wife. Consequently it was only the repentant man that Paul later on
recommended to be reinstated by the congregation and saved from Satan’s designs.
36
This forgiveness of a marriage mate that repents is radically different from letting a wife
commit adultery and then collecting what is called “woman damages” from her violator. Some
polygamists keep a number of concubines for the express purpose of prostituting them, just to
collect “woman damages” over and over again on the same concubine. This is worse than
prostituting one’s own daughter. (Lev. 19:29, NW) If a person forgivingly takes an erring mate
back again it should be without collecting such damages. Taking the financial damages condones
the adultery and makes commerce of it. Forgiving the guilty and seeking no financial damages
keeps the innocent one clean. It makes him appreciate more the sinfulness of the unclean course
rather than the commercial profit possible by the wicked prostituting of a wife.
37
Before coming to a knowledge of God’s truth and his requirements a person might have
legally divorced his mate on unscriptural grounds and then remarried. If this person is now
holding onto the new marriage and accepts the Kingdom message, the Christian congregation
cannot do anything about altering his marriage estate. It must accept him in the civil status in
which God’s message finds him, trusting in God’s forgiveness of his wrongdoings before he knew
better, his sins of ignorance. But the Christian congregation must require that he be found living
true to his obligations in his second legal marriage. Otherwise, it could not believe that his
dedication to God was accepted and it could not grant him any baptism in water.
38
If a married Christian commits adultery, the Christian mate may want to divorce. However, in
order to bring no unnecessary reproach upon Jehovah’s people by the unclean unfaithfulness of
one of his witnesses, the Christian congregation should first excommunicate the unfaithful
member. Then the clean, innocent mate can take public court proceedings against the unfaithful
as one who is now not a member of the congregation, not one of Jehovah’s witnesses. Thus the
theocratic organization suffers no public shame.
39
All in all, it is the duty of the Christian congregation to take note of the basic reason for a
divorce by a member or by a married couple of the congregation. If the reason is unscriptural, the
congregation must observe the course of the divorced afterward. The immorality cause of a
divorce may not always be stated in the petition for divorce or in the judicial decree. In some
lands the reason for the grant of divorce may be stated as injures graves et publiques (“serious
and public injuries”). Nearly always this means adultery; however, to protect innocent ones who
could be affected by reproach or public embarrassment, the ground for divorce may be worded
thus. The congregation should inform itself of the specific reason. It cannot excommunicate any
member just for divorcing on unscriptural grounds, but if that member remarries before the death
or immorality of the divorced mate, the congregation would disfellowship this member for
adulterous remarriage.
40
When a Christian merely asks God’s forgiveness for the course he has taken in
unscripturally divorcing his mate, it does not free him to remarry. His being forgiven his sins in
general does not cancel or annul the legal marriage that was dissolved on unscriptural grounds. It
does not change his married status. If it did, then the divorcer of another on unscriptural grounds
would not be committing adultery by remarrying. Remember this: a marriage broken up by
unscriptural divorce either before or after one dedicates oneself to God is not really dissolved in

59
God’s sight by asking for his forgiveness of sins; any more so than God’s forgiveness of the sins
of a criminal in prison would cancel his prison sentence and free him to walk out the prison gates
at will. Hence remarriage without Scriptural permission or authorization is adulterous and the
congregation will disfellowship the offender. Likewise, if a Christian married a worldly person that
was divorced on unscriptural grounds, that Christian is committing fornication and should be
disfellowshiped.—Rom. 7:2-4; 1 Cor. 7:39.
41
An improper remarriage will make a divorce effective and will free the innocent party to
continue in the congregation and to remarry if that innocent one chooses to do so. However, the
one improperly remarrying must be disfellowshiped as committing adultery, and thus comes into a
dangerous condition that threatens his eternal existence. “He who commits adultery has no
sense; he who does it destroys himself.” (Prov. 6:32, RS) Only reinstatement can save him. But
the unscripturally remarried person may not be fully taken back into the congregation on mere
repentance. He, after reinstatement, must be subject to a sufficiently long period of probation, at
least a year, to let him show the fruits of a sincere repentance together with a right respect for
marriage. His legal remarriage still holds good before the law of the land and must have proper
legal grounds in order to be dissolved in court. Even if his former, unscripturally divorced wife
should die or remarry after he did, he is not thereby automatically reinstated. He must still repent,
confess, make application for reinstatement and submit to the probation period. If the repentance
bears the required fruitage of a proper fulfillment of his obligations in the new legal marriage and
if then he is fully readmitted to the congregation, he is ever after disqualified from holding any
official, exemplary, responsible office or privilege in the congregation. His private past in the truth
is not a good example.
42
Marriage true and clean is a privilege from Jehovah God. He himself arranged it, and “there
is no unrighteousness in him.” (Ps. 92:15, AS) Happy are the Christians that are faithful to the
divinely imposed obligations of their marriage. They uphold the true dignity and honorableness of
this divine institution. They take to heart the Christian commandment: “Let marriage be honorable
among all, and the marriage bed be without defilement, for God will judge fornicators and
adulterers.” (Heb. 13:4, NW) They enjoy not primarily the pleasures of the fleshly relationship but
chiefly the spiritual opportunities that this close union of the two sexes affords them. This fulfills
the idealness of marriage and earns God’s approval and blessing. It makes wedlock a help
toward gaining salvation and serving the Most High God. It vindicates Jehovah God in lovingly
instituting this provision for man’s joy and for fulfilling the divine purpose.
[Footnotes]
Gen. 11:30; 17:17; 25:19-26; 29:31; 30:1, 2, 22-25; Luke 1:5-7, 18, 24, 57.
[Study Questions]
1. What marriage rule must prevail among Christians, as shown by what scriptures?
2. From whom only may a man draw sexual delight?
3. (a) What did God’s law provide that a wife should receive from her husband? (b) How did that
law safeguard a man’s marriage rights?
4. What may Christian couples choose to do and that without censure?
5. What misconceptions have caused celibate marriages, and why have these never fared well?
6, 7. Celibate marriages involve what inconsistencies, and what advice does Paul give in this
regard?
8. (a) Why is faithfulness in marriage important? (b) What counsel does Peter give husbands?
9. How should husbands love their wives, and what are some of the ways in which they can
show this?
10. How can husbands and wives enhance each other’s happiness, and what common
possession ought to provoke love between them?

60
11. (a) What does God’s Word require of wives, and in what has failure to do so resulted?
(b) What is the purpose of all Scriptural advice to married couples?
12, 13. (a) Upon what various grounds do the laws of man allow divorce? (b) But what did Jesus
say was the sole valid ground?
14, 15. Adultery results in what sin against one’s own body, and how does God’s Word regard an
adulterer?
16. What only breaks the marriage union, and, therefore, what kind of divorce does not free one
for remarriage?
17. (a) Why is a widow or a widower free to remarry? (b) What may persons declared legal
widows or widowers do, yet what responsibility must they accept?
18. (a) How do God’s law and man’s laws differ regarding impotence as a ground for divorce?
(b) Regarding artificial insemination?
19. What Scriptural examples show barrenness is not a ground for divorce?
20. (a) How does God’s Word regard filthy sex perversions? (b) Yet why are these no valid
grounds for divorce with purpose of remarriage?
21. (a) Why are mental illnesses or incurable or loathsome physical diseases no grounds for
divorce? (b) Rather, such conditions provide the opportunity for exercising what?
22-24. (a) Why is a change or difference in religion no grounds for separation or divorce?
(b) What advice does Paul give mates in such situations, and what should determine
whether a Christian should leave his unbelieving mate?
25. How does God consider the children of such marriages, and how should the believing mate
treat the unbelieving one?
26. (a) What may unjust treatment make necessary, but why is this no ground for divorce with
right to remarry? (b) What should be the attitude of separated mates, as noted by Laban’s
words?
27. Why is spiritual adultery no basis for Scriptural divorce, and why is it well for a believer to
continue with an unbeliever?
28. (a) Limiting divorce to adultery does not give mates what allowance? (b) How are some of
man’s laws partial in contrast with God’s law?
29. Why may a man not look upon a woman not his wife with the desire to have relations with
her?
30, 31. (a) When may an innocent mate forgive the other that has sinned? (b) What course
should the congregation pursue where forgiveness is granted? Where refused?
32. (a) What course must the forgiving husband pursue if he does not want congregational action
to follow? (b) What action should the congregation take against the one with whom the
adultery was committed?
33. From what suitable congregational action does the innocent one’s forgiveness not protect the
guilty mate?
34. What are some Israelite examples of husbands forgiving guilty wives?
35. In the case of the Corinthian brother who committed fornication with his father’s wife, what
consideration may have induced Paul to order only the guilty man to be excommunicated?
36. Why may not financial damages be taken for adultery?
37. What may those do who, before coming into the truth, remarried after an unscriptural divorce,
and why?

61
38. If a Christian wishes to divorce an unfaithful dedicated mate what should the congregation
first do?
39, 40. (a) If an unscriptural divorce is obtained what must the congregation observe regarding
the divorced ones and when must it take action? (b) Why does repentance after an
unscriptural divorce not free anyone for remarriage?
41. (a) What does an improper remarriage do for the innocent party that remains single? (b) What
action must be taken toward the party improperly remarrying, and from what would such a
party be barred ever after?
42. Why are those who uphold the divinely imposed obligations of marriage happy?

Questions From Readers

● In the case of where a father or mother or son or daughter is disfellowshiped, how

should such person be treated by members of the family in their family relationship?—P.
C., Ontario, Canada.
We are not living today among theocratic nations where such members of our fleshly family
relationship could be exterminated for apostasy from God and his theocratic organization, as was
possible and was ordered in the nation of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai and in the land of
Palestine. “Thou shalt surely kill him; thy hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and
afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him to death with stones, because he
hath sought to draw thee away from Jehovah thy God, . . . And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and
shall do no more any such wickedness as this is in the midst of thee.”—Deut. 13:6-11, AS.
Being limited by the laws of the worldly nation in which we live and also by the laws of God
through Jesus Christ, we can take action against apostates only to a certain extent, that is,
consistent with both sets of laws. The law of the land and God’s law through Christ forbid us to kill
apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship.
However, God’s law requires us to recognize their being disfellowshiped from his congregation,
and this despite the fact that the law of the land in which we live requires us under some natural
obligation to live with and have dealings with such apostates under the same roof.
God’s law does not allow a marriage partner to dismiss his mate because his mate becomes
disfellowshiped or apostatizes. Neither will the law of the land in most cases allow a divorce to be
granted on such grounds. The faithful believer and the apostate or disfellowshiped mate must
legally continue to live together and render proper marriage dues one to the other. A father may
not legally dismiss his minor child from his household because of apostasy or disfellowshiping,
and a minor child or children may not abandon their father or their mother just because he
becomes unfaithful to God and his theocratic organization. The parent must by laws of God and
of man fulfill his parental obligations to the child or children as long as they are dependent minors,
and the child or children must render filial submission to the parent as long as legally underage or
as long as being without parental consent to depart from the home. Of course, if the children are
of age, then there can be a departing and breaking of family ties in a physical way, because the
spiritual ties have already snapped.
If children are of age and continue to associate with a disfellowshiped parent because of
receiving material support from him or her, then they must consider how far their spiritual
interests are being endangered by continuing under this unequal arrangement, and whether they
can arrange to support themselves, living apart from the fallen-away parent. Their continuing to
receive material support should not make them compromise so as to ignore the disfellowshiped

62
state of the parent. If, because of acting according to the disfellowship order of the company of
God’s people, they become threatened with a withdrawal of the parental support, then they must
be willing to take such consequences.
Satan’s influence through the disfellowshiped member of the family will be to cause the other
member or members of the family who are in the truth to join the disfellowshiped member in his
course or in his position toward God’s organization. To do this would be disastrous, and so the
faithful family member must recognize and conform to the disfellowship order. How would or
could this be done while living under the same roof or in personal, physical contact daily with the
disfellowshiped? In this way: By refusing to have religious relationship with the disfellowshiped.
The marriage partner would render the marriage dues according to the law of the land and in
due payment for all material benefits bestowed and accepted. But to have religious communion
with the disfellowshiped person—no, there would be none of that! The faithful marriage partner
would not discuss religion with the apostate or disfellowshiped and would not accompany that
one to his (or her) place of religious association and participate in the meetings with that one. As
Jesus said: “If he does not listen even to the congregation [which was obliged to disfellowship
him], let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector [to Jehovah’s sanctified
nation].” (Matt. 18:17, NW) Hurt to such one would not be authorized, but there would be no
spiritual or religious fellowshiping.
The same rule would apply to those who are in the relation of parent and child or of child and
parent. What natural obligation falls upon them according to man’s law and God’s law the faithful
parent or the faithful child will comply with. But as for rendering more than that and having
religious fellowship with such one in violation of the congregation’s disfellowship order—no, none
of that for the faithful one! If the faithful suffers in some material or other way for the faithful
adherence to theocratic law, then he must accept this as suffering for righteousness’ sake.
The purpose of observing the disfellowship order is to make the disfellowshiped one realize
the error of his way and to shame him, if possible, so that he may be recovered, and also to
safeguard your own salvation to life in the new world in vindication of God. (2 Thess. 3:14, 15;
Titus 2:8) Because of being in close, indissoluble natural family ties and being of the same
household under the one roof you may have to eat material food and live physically with that one
at home, in which case 1 Corinthians 5:9-11 and 2 John 10 could not apply; but do not defeat the
purpose of the congregation’s disfellowship order by eating spiritual or religious food with such
one or receiving such one favorably in a religious way and bidding him farewell with a wish for his
prosperity in his apostate course.

The Bible’s Viewpoint

Can a Marriage Be Saved After Infidelity?

“I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and
marries another commits adultery.”—MATTHEW 19:9.

WITH those words Jesus Christ made allowance for a Christian to choose to divorce an
unfaithful mate. However, what if the innocent mate chooses to preserve the marriage and the
couple resolve to rebuild their relationship? What challenges lie ahead for the couple, and how
can they meet those challenges successfully? Let us see how the Bible helps to answer these
questions.
A House Demolished

63
 We must first understand the magnitude of the damage caused by infidelity. As Jesus Christ
explained, the Originator of marriage purposed that a husband and wife be “no longer two, but
one flesh.” He added: “Therefore, what God has yoked together let no man put apart.” Yes,
marriage is designed to link humans inseparably. When a person breaks the marriage vow by
committing adultery, agonizing consequences ensue.—Matthew 19:6; Galatians 6:7.
Testifying to this is the distress experienced by the innocent mate. The effects of adultery can
be likened to those of a hurricane that shatters homes. Dr. Shirley P. Glass observed: “Several
patients I’ve worked with have told me that it would have been easier for them if their spouse had
died.” Granted, some who have lost their mates in death may disagree. However, it is clear that
adultery causes excruciating pain. Some people never completely get over the betrayal.
In view of such anguish, one might ask, ‘Must adultery end a marriage?’ Not necessarily.
Jesus’ statement regarding adultery shows that the faithful mate has the Scriptural option to
divorce but is not obligated to do so. Some couples decide to rebuild and strengthen what was
crushed, by making needed changes—although nothing excuses adultery.
Of course, it is better to make necessary changes in a marital relationship when both partners
are faithful to each other. However, even when infidelity has occurred, some innocent mates
choose to preserve the marriage. Rather than base such a decision on wishful thinking, the
innocent mate should weigh the consequences. She will likely give thought to the needs of her
children as well as to her own spiritual, emotional, physical, and financial needs. She will be wise
also to consider whether her marriage is salvageable.
Is the Marriage Salvageable?
Before attempting to rebuild a house wrecked by a hurricane, a builder must determine
whether it can be restored. Likewise, before endeavoring to rebuild a relationship that has been
shattered by infidelity, a couple—especially the faithful mate—will want to make a realistic
assessment of the potential for restored intimacy and trust in the marriage.
One factor to be considered is whether the guilty mate shows sincere repentance or is,
instead, still committing adultery “in his heart.” (Matthew 5:27, 28) Although he promises to
change, is he hesitant to abruptly end his immoral relationship? (Exodus 20:14; Leviticus 20:10;
Deuteronomy 5:18) Does he still have a roving eye? Does he blame his wife for his adultery? If
so, efforts to restore trust to the marriage are unlikely to succeed. On the other hand, if he ends
the illicit affair, accepts responsibility for his wrongdoing, and shows that he is wholly committed
to rebuilding the marriage, his wife might see a basis for hoping that genuine trust can one day be
restored.—Matthew 5:29.
Also, can the faithful mate bring herself to forgive? This does not mean that she is not to voice
her feelings of deep hurt regarding what happened or that she is to pretend that nothing has
changed. It does mean that she will endeavor, in due time, not to continue holding deep
resentment. Such forgiveness takes time but can help to establish a solid basis on which to
rebuild the marriage.
Clearing Away the “Debris”
After the faithful mate has decided to save their marriage, what steps might a couple next
take? Just as the debris around a home badly damaged by a hurricane must be removed, the
“debris” surrounding the marriage must be cleared away. This can be accomplished to an extent
if the couple express their feelings to each other. Proverbs 15:22 says: “There is a frustrating of
plans where there is no confidential talk.” The Hebrew word translated “confidential talk” implies
intimacy and is rendered “intimate group” at Psalm 89:7. It would therefore involve, not mere
surface dialogue, but honest and fervent communication in which both parties reveal their
deepest feelings.—Proverbs 13:10.
For example, in some cases the faithful mate might have further questions to ask her
husband. How did the affair get started? How long did it go on? Who else knows about it?
Granted, it will be painful for the couple to discuss these particulars. However, the faithful mate
might find such knowledge necessary to the restoration of trust. If so, it is best that the unfaithful

64
mate answer honestly and considerately. He should explain matters in a loving and kindly
manner, bearing in mind that the purpose of the interchange is to heal, not to hurt. (Proverbs
12:18; Ephesians 4:25, 26) Both will need to employ discretion, self-control, and empathetic
listening as they express their feelings about what happened.—Proverbs 18:13; 1 Corinthians
9:25; 2 Peter 1:6.
Those who are Jehovah’s Witnesses may want to request assistance from the congregation
elders. Of course, for Christians, serious sins such as adultery must immediately be confessed to
the elders, who are concerned with the spiritual welfare of the couple and the congregation. It
may be that when he met with the elders, the adulterer showed genuine repentance and was thus
allowed to remain in the congregation. In such a case, the elders can give continued assistance
to both mates.—James 5:14, 15.
Rebuilding
After the couple have stabilized their feelings to the extent possible, they are in a good
position to rebuild vital aspects of their marriage. Earnest communication continues to be needed.
Where weaknesses are discovered, appropriate changes must be made.
The need to make changes will fall primarily on the guilty mate. However, the faithful mate
must do her part in strengthening weak areas in the marriage. This does not mean that the
adultery was her fault or that it can be excused—there is no valid excuse for committing such a
sin. (Compare Genesis 3:12; 1 John 5:3.) It simply means that there may have been problems in
the marriage that needed resolving. Rebuilding is a joint project. Is there a need to strengthen
mutual values and goals? Have spiritual activities been neglected? This process of discovering
significant weaknesses and making needed changes is at the very heart of rebuilding a badly
damaged marriage.
Maintenance
Even a well-built house requires regular maintenance. How important it is, then, to maintain a
rebuilt relationship. The couple must not allow the passing of time to erode their determination to
hold to their new resolves. Rather than become disheartened if they experience minor setbacks,
such as relapsing into poor communication habits, they should take immediate steps to get back
on track and continue moving forward.—Proverbs 24:16; Galatians 6:9.
Above all, husband and wife should give their spiritual routine the greatest priority, never
allowing it, or their marriage, to take a backseat to some other activity. Psalm 127:1 says: “Unless
Jehovah himself builds the house, it is to no avail that its builders have worked hard on it.” Also,
Jesus warned: “Everyone hearing these sayings of mine and not doing them will be likened to a
foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. And the rain poured down and the floods came
and the winds blew and struck against that house and it caved in, and its collapse was great.”—
Matthew 7:24-27.
Yes, if Bible principles are ignored because they are difficult to apply, the marriage will remain
vulnerable to the next stormy test of fidelity. However, if husband and wife hold to Bible standards
in all matters, their marriage will have divine blessing. They will also have the most powerful
incentive to marital faithfulness—the desire to please the Originator of marriage, Jehovah God.—
Matthew 22:36-40; Ecclesiastes 4:12.
[Footnotes]
There are valid reasons why a person might choose to divorce an adulterous mate. For a detailed
discussion of this matter, see “The Bible’s Viewpoint: Adultery—To Forgive or Not to Forgive?”
in the August 8, 1995, issue of Awake!
We refer to the unfaithful mate as a male. One poll estimates that men have twice the infidelity
rate of women. However, the principles discussed apply equally when the innocent spouse is
the Christian man.
For information on good listening, see Awake! of January 22, 1994, pages 6-9, and December 8,
1994, pages 10-13.

65
 Multiple Articles
Contents
► g94 1/22 pp. 6-7 Husbands and Wives—Do They Really Talk Differently?
► g94 1/22 pp. 7-9 Anatomy of an Argument

*** g94 1/22 pp. 6-7 Husbands and Wives—Do They Really Talk Differently? ***
feels loved if Jerry finds out her views before making a decision, though she wants him to take
the lead. When she has to make a decision, she likes to consult her husband, not necessarily so
that he will tell her what to do, but to show her closeness to and reliance on him.
It’s very hard for Pam to come right out and say she needs something. She doesn’t want to
nag Jerry or make him feel that she is unhappy. Instead, she waits to be noticed or drops hints.
When Pam converses, she is intrigued by minute details and asks many questions. This is
natural because of her sensitivity to and intense interest in people and relationships.
When Pam listens, she punctuates the speaker’s words with interjections, nods, or queries to
show that she is following the speaker and cares about what he or she has to say.
She works hard to know intuitively what people need. Offering help without being asked is a
wonderful way to show love. She especially wants to help her husband to grow and improve.
When Pam has a problem, she may feel overwhelmed. She must talk, not so much to seek a
solution, but to express her feelings. She needs to know that someone understands and cares.
When her emotions are excited, Pam makes sweeping, dramatic statements. She doesn’t mean it
literally when she says: “You never listen!”
Pam’s best childhood friend was not one that she did things with but one that she talked about
everything with. So in marriage she is not nearly as interested in outside activities as she is in an
empathetic listener with whom she may share her feelings.
Home is a place where Pam can talk without being judged. She doesn’t hesitate to reveal her
fears and troubles to Jerry. If in need of help, she is not ashamed to admit it, for she trusts that
her husband is there for her and cares enough to listen.
Pam usually feels loved and secure in her marriage. But occasionally, for no apparent reason,
she begins feeling insecure and unloved and urgently needs reassurance and companionship.
Yes, Jerry and Pam, complements of each other, are quite different. The differences between
them create the potential for grave misunderstandings, even though both may have the best of
intentions to be loving and supportive. If we could hear each one’s perspective on the above
situation, what would they say?
What They Saw Through Their Own Eyes
“The minute I walked through the door, I could see that Pam was upset,” Jerry would say. “I
assumed that when she was ready, she would tell me why. The problem didn’t seem so major to
me. I thought if I just helped her to see that she didn’t need to be so upset and that the solution
was easy, she’d feel better. It really hurt, after I listened to her, when she said, ‘You never listen
to me!’ I felt as if she were blaming me for all her frustration!”
“The whole day had been one big disaster,” Pam would explain. “I knew it wasn’t Jerry’s fault.
But when he came in all cheery, I felt he was ignoring the fact that I was upset. Why didn’t he ask
me what was wrong? When I told him the problem, he basically said I was being silly, that the
whole thing was petty. Instead of saying he understood how I felt, Jerry, the repairman, told me
how to fix the problem. I didn’t want solutions, I wanted sympathy!”
Despite the appearances of this temporary breach, Jerry and Pam love each other very much.
What insights will help them express that love clearly?

66
 Seeing Through Each Other’s Eyes
Jerry felt that it would be intrusive to ask Pam what was wrong, so he naturally did for her
what he would want others to do for him. He waited for her to open up and speak. Now Pam was
upset not just over the problem but over the fact that Jerry seemed to ignore her plea for his
support. She didn’t see his silence as a gesture of gentle respect—she saw it as uncaring. When
Pam finally spoke, Jerry listened without interrupting. But she felt he wasn’t really hearing her
feelings. Then he offered, not empathy, but a solution. This said to her: ‘Your feelings are invalid;
you’re overreacting. See how easy it is to solve this little problem?’
How different things would have been if each had been able to see things from the other’s
viewpoint! It might have gone like this:
Jerry comes home to find Pam upset. “What’s wrong, dear?” he asks gently. Tears start to
flow, and words just tumble out. Pam doesn’t say, “It’s all your fault!” or imply that Jerry isn’t doing
enough. Jerry holds her close and listens patiently. When she is finished, he says: “I’m sorry
you’re feeling bad. I can see why you’re so upset.” Pam replies: “Thanks so much for listening. I
feel much better knowing you understand.”
Sadly, instead of solving their differences, many couples simply choose to end their marriage
in divorce. Lack of communication is the villain that devastates many homes. Arguments explode
that shake the very foundations of the marriage. How does it happen? The next article tells how it
happens and how to avoid it.

*** g94 1/22 pp. 7-9 Anatomy of an Argument ***

Anatomy of an Argument

SHE needs to air feelings. He wants to give solutions. The millions of marital arguments down
through time may have had many different tunes, but they have often been variations on a few
basic themes. Understanding your mate’s different perspective or communication style may help
reduce these blazing forest fires to glowing charcoal in the hearth of a happy home.
“Don’t Run My Life!”
The stereotype of the domineering, nagging wife may hit home with many a husband who
finds himself hemmed in at every turn with advice, requests, and criticisms. The Bible
acknowledges such feelings, saying: “The contentions of a wife are as a leaking roof that drives
one away.” (Proverbs 19:13) A wife may make a request that her husband silently resists for
reasons unknown to her. Thinking he didn’t hear, this time she tells him what to do. His resistance
stiffens. A nagging wife and hen-pecked husband? Or two people who simply haven’t
communicated clearly?
From a wife’s perspective, she best expresses her love for her husband when she offers
helpful advice. In her husband’s view, she is ordering him around and implying that he
is incompetent. “Don’t forget your briefcase” is for her a statement of caring, making sure he has
what he needs. It reminds him of his mother calling out the door after him, “Did you take your
mittens?”
A weary wife may gently say, “Do you want to eat out tonight?” really meaning, “Won’t you
take me out to dinner? I’m too tired to cook.” But her devoted husband may seize the moment to
praise her cooking and swear that he prefers it to any other. Or he may feel, ‘She’s trying to
manipulate me!’ Meanwhile, a wife may resentfully say to herself, ‘Why should I have to ask?’
“You Don’t Love Me!”
“How can she think that?” exclaims a frustrated, perplexed husband. “I work, pay the bills,
even bring her flowers sometimes!”

67
 While all humans need to feel loved, a woman has a special need to be repeatedly reassured
of this. She may not say so aloud, but inside she may feel like an unwanted burden, especially if
her monthly cycle is dealing her a dose of the blues. On such occasions her husband may
withdraw, thinking she wants some time to herself. She may interpret his lack of closeness as a
confirmation of her worst fear—he doesn’t love her anymore. She might lash out, seeking to force
him to love and support her.
“What’s Wrong, Honey?”
A man’s response to a stressful problem may be to seek a quiet place to ponder over it. A
woman may intuitively sense some tension and instinctively react by trying to pull him out of his
self-dug hole. However well-meaning these efforts are, a husband may find them intrusive and
humiliating. As he retreats to consider his problem, he glances over his shoulder to see his loyal
wife trotting behind in hot pursuit. He hears that persistent loving voice: “Honey, are you all right?
What’s wrong? Let’s talk about it.”
If there is no reply, a wife may feel hurt. When she has a problem, she wants to talk it out with
him. But the man she loves doesn’t want to share his feelings. “He must not love me anymore”
may be her conclusion. So when the unsuspecting man finally emerges from his inner world,
content with the solution he has found, he also finds, not the concerned loving mate he left
behind, but a riled wife ready to challenge him for leaving her out in the cold.
“You Never Listen to Me!”
The charge seems ludicrous. It seems to him that all he ever does is listen. But as his wife
talks, she has the distinct feeling that her words are being screened and analyzed by a computer
solving a math problem. Her suspicions are confirmed when, right in the middle of a sentence, he
says: “Well, why don’t you just . . . ?”
When a wife comes to her husband with a problem, very often she is neither laying the blame
on him nor looking for a solution from him. What she wants most is a sympathetic ear that will
hear, not just the cold facts, but her feelings about it. Then she wants, not advice, but validation of
her feelings. That’s why many a well-meaning husband has triggered an explosion when all he
said was: “Sweetheart, you shouldn’t feel that way. It’s not that bad.”
Oftentimes, people expect their mates to be mind readers. “We’ve been married for 25 years,”
said one man. “If she doesn’t know what I want by now, she must not care or is not paying
attention.” One author states in his book on the marriage relationship: “When partners don’t tell
each other what they want and constantly criticize each other for missing the boat, it’s no wonder
that the spirit of love and cooperation disappears. In its place comes . . . the power struggle, in
which each partner tries to force the other to meet his or her needs.”
“You’re So Irresponsible!”
A wife may not say so outright to her husband, but she can imply it just as clearly in her tone
of voice. “Why are you so late?” could be seen as a request for information. More likely, though,
her accusing look and hand on hip says to her husband: “You irresponsible little boy, you had me
worried. Why didn’t you call? You’re so inconsiderate! Now dinner is ruined!”
She is right, of course, about dinner. But if an argument erupts, is their relationship at risk as
well? “Most arguments occur not because two people disagree, but because either the man feels
that the woman disapproves of his point of view or the woman disapproves of the way he is
talking to her,” notes Dr. John Gray.
Some are of the opinion that at home one should be free to let the words fly unrestrained. But
a good communicator seeks to work out an accord and achieve peace, considering the listener’s
feelings. We might roughly compare such talk to serving your spouse a glass of ice water as
opposed to splashing it in his or her face. We could say the difference is all in the delivery.
Applying the words of Colossians 3:12-14 will dissipate arguments and usher in a happy
home: “Clothe yourselves with the tender affections of compassion, kindness, lowliness of mind,
mildness, and long-suffering. Continue putting up with one another and forgiving one another

68
freely if anyone has a cause for complaint against another. Even as Jehovah freely forgave you,
so do you also. But, besides all these things, clothe yourselves with love, for it is a perfect bond of
union.”

The Bible’s Viewpoint

What Kind of Divorcing Does God Hate?

“THE problems that went along with my divorce were many,” wrote one Christian woman
whose husband had been unfaithful. “The adjustment period isn’t an easy time. I had to adjust not
only mentally but financially and spiritually as well. I wondered if Jehovah would bless my
decision, knowing that the Scriptures say that he hates divorce. This was a constant worry.”
When a marriage ends, the complications do not. A whole new set of problems suddenly
arise. The feelings—depression, loneliness, and guilt—that surface out of nowhere. The custody
battles to contend with. A son or a daughter crying out for Mommy or Daddy. The financial
difficulties that exert pressure. Trying to cope with the desire for the intimacies that only marriage
allows.
Then there is God’s view to think about. The Bible says that God ‘hates a divorcing.’ (Malachi
2:16) Do these words mean that God hates all divorcing? Does a Christian, therefore, need to
feel guilty for seeking a divorce when a mate has been unfaithful? For the answers, let us look at
the circumstances in Malachi’s day that prompted God to say that he hates divorce.
“You Must Not Deal Treacherously”
Malachi prophesied after 443 B.C.E., almost a century after the Jewish exiles returned from
Babylon. Deplorable conditions had developed in Judah, especially among the priests. (Malachi
2:7-9) Practices such as lying, adultery, fraud, and oppression were prevalent among the
Israelites in general. (Malachi 3:5) These conditions provoked so much skepticism that some
concluded: “It is of no value to serve God.”—Malachi 3:14.
The religious and moral decay in Malachi’s day was reflected also in a declining respect for
marriage. Many Israelite men were divorcing the wives of their youth, perhaps in order to marry
younger pagan women. The altar of Jehovah became covered with the tears of the rejected wives
who came to the sanctuary to weep and sigh before God.—Malachi 2:13-15.
How did Jehovah God feel about such divorcing? Through Malachi he warned: “‘You people
must guard yourselves respecting your spirit, and with the wife of your youth may no one
deal treacherously. For he has hated a divorcing,’ Jehovah the God of Israel has said . . . ‘And
you must guard yourselves respecting your spirit, and you must not deal treacherously.’” (Malachi
2:15, 16) According to the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, the Hebrew word
rendered ‘deal treacherously’ means “deal deceitfully, (deal) unfaithfully.” At Psalm 59:5, a
participle form of this verb is rendered “traitors.”
Against such a background, we can better understand the words at Malachi 2:16: “He has
hated a divorcing.” Jehovah hates the kind of divorcing that involves the frivolous putting away of
one mate in order to take another. For example, a man who commits adultery and then divorces
his innocent mate against her wishes or pressures her to divorce him so that he can marry
someone else would indeed be dealing treacherously with his wife. This deceitful, faithless
treatment of an innocent mate is a heinous sin in God’s eyes. A man who takes the best years of
a woman’s life and then puts her away, perhaps in favor of a younger woman, is indeed a traitor.
What, though, about an innocent mate who chooses to divorce a spouse who has committed
adultery? Does God hate such divorces too?
God’s Own Example
Can God really know what it feels like to be faced with the decision of whether to divorce an
adulterous mate or not? Symbolically speaking, Jehovah considered himself married to the

69
ancient nation of Israel by means of his covenant with them. (Isaiah 54:1, 5, 6; 62:1-6; Jeremiah
31:31, 32) As a husband, Jehovah was ever faithful, never turning his affections to other nations.
(Psalm 147:19, 20; Amos 3:1, 2) But what about Israel? What kind of wife did the nation prove to
be?
As a whole the nation repeatedly proved unfaithful to the covenant, eventually reaching the
state described in the prayer recorded at Daniel 9:5, 6: “We have sinned and done wrong and
acted wickedly and rebelled; and there has been a turning aside from your commandments and
from your judicial decisions. And we have not listened to your servants the prophets, who have
spoken in your name to our kings, our princes and our forefathers and to all the people of the
land.” In Jehovah’s eyes, such unfaithfulness was tantamount to a wife’s committing adultery.—
Jeremiah 3:1.
After centuries of patience and long-suffering, what did Jehovah do? By taking strong judicial
action, casting first the northern tribes then the southern tribes out of their land into exile,
Jehovah, in effect, divorced himself from the nation. (Jeremiah 3:8; Daniel 9:11, 12) So in view of
his own example, how could Jehovah God hate it when an innocent mate chooses to divorce a
spouse who has been unfaithful to the marriage vow?
Marriage is a sacred arrangement in God’s eyes, and those who enter it should not take lightly
the vow they have made. (Hebrews 13:4) But if one’s mate is unfaithful to the vow by committing
“fornication,” God grants the innocent one the right to decide whether to forgive or to seek a
divorce. (Matthew 19:9) That is a difficult decision, one that the innocent mate alone must make.
Should the innocent one decide to end the marriage, he or she need not feel guilty for seeking a
divorce. Remember that Jehovah hates, not all divorcing, but the kind of divorcing that involves
the unscriptural putting away of one mate in order to take another.
[Footnotes]
Throughout the Scriptures, Jehovah God speaks of himself as hating attitudes and forms of
conduct that are sinful. (Deuteronomy 16:22; Proverbs 6:16-19; 8:13; Isaiah 1:14; 61:8)
Viewed in this light, the divorcing referred to at Malachi 2:16 must also be of a type that is
sinful in his eyes.
Divorce from an adulterous mate is a personal decision. For a discussion of the various factors
that the innocent mate can weigh in deciding whether to obtain a Scriptural divorce, please
see the Watchtower issues of August 15, 1993, page 5, and May 15, 1988, pages 4 to 7.
[Picture Credit Line on page 20]
Historic Costume in Pictures/Dover Publications, Inc., New York

70
71