Reasons for Divorce

 

This is an excerpt from a new book I am working on. Some might find this controversial, some might find it freeing, other might just need more time to wrestle with it, but this is important for people to engage with, because this is biblical and it is a reality many people face in their lives:

Reasons for Divorce (v.9)

What reasons do people give for divorce? We grew apart. She let herself go. We had different dreams. He wanted me to be his mum and maid. She nagged too much. Life just got on top of us, etc, etc. But we see Jesus gives us one reason, and most people misread it. Jesus said, “9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” Most people read this and say that the only reason Jesus gives for divorce is adultery. But he does not say that, he explicitly says, “sexual immorality…” Or sexual sin. This is much broader than adultery. Adultery, as Jesus points out here, is to have sex with another man’s wife or another woman’s husband.

Sexual sin covers a host of other sexual sins, like pornography, homosexuality, fornication and more. We don’t need to go over them all now. So, we can say, that, according to Jesus sexual sin is the legitimate reason for divorce. But what is divorce, and why does this sin allow for it?

This might seem like a no-brainer to ask “what is divorce?” But you will see as we go along, it is actually vital to drill down on this, because there is a big difference between legitimate divorce and illegitimate divorce. The Greek word Jesus uses for divorce in Matthew 19 is “apoluo”. You are probably thinking. Big deal, why are getting into the Greek?

Well, here is why. This is exact same word Jesus uses in the parable of the unmerciful servant when Jesus explains what forgiveness looks like, Matthew. 18:27, “And out of pity for him, the master of that servant released him and forgave him the debt.” The word for released here is “apoluo”, the exact same word. The servant was released from all obligation of the debt. But what is even more mind blowing is that Jesus uses the same word in Luke 6:37, “37 Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven;…” That’s what blew my mind. The same word Jesus uses for divorce he uses twice to refer to forgiveness.

Wait what??? How is this even possible?

Well, what happens when you truly forgive someone? You release them from the debt or any obligation. You let it go, let it go…now some of you are going to sing that song all day, right…What happens when you legitimately divorce someone? You set them free, you cut them loose. You are from that moment on no longer obligated to them, biblically speaking, because you have cut the bond. This is at the core of what divorce means, it means setting free of all obligations.

In a legitimate divorce, the marriage has been annulled. Spiritually speaking. It is as if it no longer existed. You are now a single person again. The reason sexual sin allows for this is because when you commit sexual sin you break this spiritual bond. You sunder something spiritually. Because you unite with the other person. This is why the person who is legitimately divorced, and I stress legitimately divorced, in Jesus’ eyes, can remarry. Because they are free of all the obligations to their previous annulled marriage.

This is why the legitimately divorced, and again I stress legitimately divorced, man who remarries only has one wife, not two. The other marriage, ACCORDING TO JESUS, is annulled, terminated. The same is true for the woman who legitimately remarries.

The meaning of the word divorce is literally “cut free” or “set loose”. That is what it means. Make sure you do not get confused even though the word Jesus uses for ‘divorce’ can also mean ‘forgiveness’, divorce is not forgiveness.  So, if you are legitimately divorced in God’s eyes no one can hold it against you. Sexually immorality breaks the bond and you are free to then divorce and move on. Some Christians really arc up at this, but this is precisely what Jesus says right here.

This is also why Joseph could be called a righteous and just man, even though he intended to divorce Mary, “And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly” (Matt. 1:19). In Joseph’s eyes Mary had obviously committed sexual immorality, which he was about to find out it was wrong. But the verse emphasizes his reasons for wanting divorce were just.

But the logical application of this is that if you are not divorced legitimately, then you are not free. You have sinned, “9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” This is the other side of the teaching upsets a lot of other Christians, because we can think of heaps of reasons for divorce. But Jesus gave only one. And he only gives it in Matthew, this is not mentioned in Mark or Luke.

This is why the disciples, as I said, are shocked, “10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” 11 But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given.” The disciples obviously could think of lots of other reasons to divorce and remarry as well. This has been a problem throughout all human history. But the truth is Jesus does not affirm this challenges the disciples and the Jews listening by pointing out that many divorced people are not legitimately divorced and therefore are not legitimately remarried. That’s what Jesus is saying. That is what the church has long taught as well. In fact, some Christians believe it is wrong to remarry anyway, even though Jesus gives a limited reason for when they can.

Now, I hear some of you thinking, but doesn’t Paul give another reason for divorce in 1 Corinthians 7. Let’s read what he says there,

“12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. 16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” (1 Cor. 7:12-16).

Paul says that if you are married to an unbeliever and they want to go, let them, you are not enslaved. What is the opposite of enslaved? Free. In other words, he says this cannot be held against you. Some think that he is adding another exception here to the only one that Jesus gave. But I don’t think he is adding to Jesus’ exception, because when someone moves on they usually move on with someone else. You could say Paul is giving a pastoral application of what Jesus’ says. Though some people think he has expanded the reasons for divorce to include abandonment.

Someone else might be thinking, Matt haven’t you taught in the past that ongoing denial of sex from the husband or wife is reason for divorce? Yes, I have and I still do. This might be more controversial, but remember Jesus said it was for sexual immorality that you could divorce and remarry, and denying your spouse in an ongoing and unrepentant way is both cruel and is also a sexual sin,

“3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control” (1 Cor. 7:3-5).

Paul says, “5 Do not deprive one another…” unless you both agree. And one person suggesting it and the other being made to agree is not what he means. Sex is both a privilege and a responsibility in marriage. “Do not deprive” is a command, unless both want to have a break, or you have a medical reason why you cannot. But that is why we say the vows, for better or worse. Because sometimes life throws hardships at us, that even effect this area of life for married couples. However, in general married men and women should make themselves available to their spouse, otherwise you are actually sinning.

I am not the first person to teach this, this teaching is found throughout church history. There are records throughout medieval Europe of marriages being annulled for this reason. And even Martin Luther said this was a reason for divorce in extreme situations. And I agree.

Now, I know this brings up a whole host of other thoughts, so we will come back to this, but for now, we are just demonstrating that denying your spouse sex is a sexual immorality. And Jesus says that sexual immorality is the only legitimate reason for divorce.

Some people don’t like this, but I think that is because they misread what Jesus says. A sexless marriage can be one of the cruellest prisons for many men and women. It is as much unfaithfulness as adultery itself.

 

We Are On Our Own Now

 

The real reason the US is going to war with Venezuela is simple, it's global power is ending, really it has ended, and now it is returning to the Monroe Doctrine, of dominating it's region. Because that is the only real effective reach it still has. If it even still has that.

-        Hamas outlasted US intervention.

-        Yemen outlasted US intervention.

-        Russia outlasted US intervention.

-        Afghanistan outlasted US intervention.

-        China is successful resisting US intervention.  

Etc, etc.

The ability for the united states to project its power around the world and actually effect change is declining. It is even possible their power will fail in South America. But not before they try to use it.

Look, I should note that I have no problem with the US military taking out drug boats. The military's job is supposed to be making borders secure. Returning to that honourable role is just and good. Borders should be patrolled by effective soldiers stopping people coming across. For too long western nations have abandoned this basic use of the military, preferring to send our soldiers far away for reasons of imperial extension. That is clearly now changing.

But we should also note that Venezuela has oil, rare earth minerals, and it is weak enough that the US thinks it can take it or at least force it to bow to its will. So, that is what it is trying. Effectively it is doing to Venezuela what Russia did to Ukraine, except with less actual justification. But it is basically doing the same thing: a dominant power is seeking to dictate to a much less powerful country.

I suspect there is also a recognition in the Trump administration that if the US is going to remain a dominant power in its region, it needs to turn its attention there. What appears to be happening in the US is that different elites with different visions over how the United States should project its power are in a political clash, and currently the faction that believes they should turn their attention to their own region is dominant. I think this faction will become more dominant over time as the reality of the United States relative weakness in the world becomes more evident.

But the lesson for us here in Australia is this: we are now on our own. Britain has no effective power, and the US's power is shrinking back to the Americas. They may still seek to exert influence from time to time outside their own region, but this will diminish over time as the new multipolar world becomes more entrenched. We are, therefore, now on our own. This will become more clear in coming years.

I say the only path to prosperity and peace for Australia is repentance and faith in God from the Prime Minister down. Others say the way forward is through a complicated series of alliances with countries that oppose China and counterbalance her power. If we go that second route, we guarantee that we will lose our sovereignty in this country. Because we will lose such a battle.

Australia got proud. We were lucky and squandered it. Prepare for a whole different world now guys.

 

Transgender Insurance Bonus

 

The thing which will eventually put an end to liberal democracy quicker than anything else in western nations, is when a significant amount of ordinary people become so sick of subsidizing nonsense, that they refuse to vote for anyone except the parliamentarians who are going to just say no; no to feminism, no to welfare programs, no to DEI, no to minority programs and much more. Of course, this might also happen simply because western societies collapse under the weight of all their social programs and personal debt, but that is just an extension of the same problem.

This is a key example of something that which will just tick off the ordinary person, because it shows that they really are just taking the piss[1] now,

“Aussie drivers can save hundreds on their car insurance by declaring their gender as non-binary.

A male driver called into Radio 2GB in Sydney on Monday to explain that they discovered a lucrative loophole in the insurance system.

The listener, a man named Ben, told Ben Fordham his car insurance quote dropped by $800 when he ticked a gender-neutral box when applying for comprehensive coverage.

“I found the box on there and thought I’m just going to give it a tick and see what it comes out with, it might be a bit of a joke,” he said.

“A joke is right, I was absolutely stunned with what I found … I’d like to see the evidence behind it.”

Fordham said “I can’t believe it”.

“The best deal goes to the non-binary driver … just tick the non-binary box, because no-one is going to be able to disprove how you are identify, you’re going to get a better deal.”

We put it to the test, getting three quotes from NRMA insurance for a middle-aged Sydney driver behind the wheel of an electric Kia EV3, and found the price varied significantly.

Changing only the driver’s stated gender, we found the male driver was quoted $2236 per year, the female driver $2061, and the non-binary driver $1955.”[2]

This is just another insulting and degrading mockery of our whole way of life. Giving an insurance bonus to people who are confused about their gender, or simply unwilling to tick a box. It is just another insult piled on top of a host of ongoing insults, that seek to place standard roles for men and women at the bottom of the rung of society.

The West became more and more open because of the idea of liberalism, and the accompanying concept that most decent people will seek to do what is best, in general, for themselves, those they love and society. Our system was not conceived to hold up to people who cared about none of the principles of decency, honesty, and honour that our nations were founded on. And this is why we see across the world that people are voting more and more for governments which lean to the right. People are sick of being taken advantage of, and we see in many ways how it literally is costing people money to be productive members of society.

We opened up society to a wide variety of perspectives and ways of life, and people abused it. Societies in the future are far less likely to be so open.

List of References

---

[1] This is a blunt Aussie saying meaning, “being taken advantage of.” Forgive the bluntness, but this insurance policy is just wrong.

[2] David McCowen, 2025, https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/motoring-news/nonbinary-drivers-benefit-from-cheaper-car-insurance/news-story/4b41ff7a488d500ac45c2db986b50a3a

Episode 30 – Come Lord Jesus. Come (Rev. 22)

 

You can watch the video of this sermon here at 8pm AEST.

Introduction

Tonight, we are going to look at the last chapter of the book of Revelation. This is episode 30 of my Revelation study and the final episode before we move onto another book of the Bible. I hope you have found this study encouraging, helpful, informative, and also I hope you have seen more clearly how this book magnifies our Lord Jesus.

My goal with this study was not to create an exhaustive analysis of the book of Revelation. If you want that there are more academic resources you can turn to, commentaries and exegesis courses for instance. My goal was to create an accessible study that helps demystify this book without pretending to have all the answers. On top of this my goal was to show that this book has great and powerful application for our everyday lives.

One of the things I have found in teaching this book over the years, is that if we take the approach of “what” it is saying and leave the “when and the how” up in the air, the book becomes far more approachable and far more accessible for many people.

Over the years this book has been neglected by many Bible teachers and this has allowed sensationalist readings to take centre stage, and the book has been turned into everything from a justification to support Israeli foreign policy, through to a guide to understand Middle Eastern affairs, through to a justification for seeing Russia as the big bad guy in the world, and so many other things. I grew up under these readings of this text, and the core thing they all have in common is that they disconnect the book from its literary and textual context and turn the imagery of Revelation into a series of choose your own adventure tracts. This does a disservice to the handling this book.

That is not to say that everyone who seeks to handle this book in a more measured way will agree on everything. This would be too bold a claim to make. But I have found much more general agreement when a more grounded approach is taken, applying this book to the experience of everyday life. I hope I have been able to communicate this effectively.

But now we must turn to the last chapter of this awesome and fearsome book. Something I am going to focus on today is that this passage appears to have something of a now but not yet quality to. This is because we live in a time where heaven is breaking into earth, to some degree, through the Church, and therefore aspects of the fulfilment of God’s plan are active in our lives and world today, though not yet in their fullness. I think you will see this as we go through the passage tonight.

But first let’s turn to our Old and New Testament imagery behind this passage and then we shall do the study questions.

Old Testament Background:

• The River and the Tree of Life (v. 1-2): The scene directly echoes and fulfills the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9-10). Where access to the tree of life was lost due to sin (Genesis 3:22-24), it is now restored and amplified, offering perpetual fruit and healing. The river also recalls the life-giving water flowing from the Temple in Ezekiel's vision (Ezekiel 47:1-12), which itself is a prophetic picture of restoration.
• Cursed No More (v. 3): This is the ultimate fulfillment of the promise that God would undo the curse pronounced in Genesis 3:17. Zechariah 14:11 also prophesies a future where "there shall be no more curse."
• Seeing God's Face (v. 4): This was an impossibility for fallen humanity (Exodus 33:20), but becomes the ultimate privilege of the redeemed, indicating full intimacy and restored relationship.
• The Alpha and Omega (v. 13): This title for God, used in Isaiah 44:6 ("I am the first and I am the last"), is here applied directly to Jesus, affirming His full divinity.

New Testament Background:

• The Throne of God and the Lamb (v. 1, 3): The entire vision is Christocentric. The throne belongs to both God and the Lamb, a powerful New Testament revelation of Jesus' co-equality with the Father (John 1:1, 14).
• The Water of Life (v. 17): This invitation fulfills Jesus' own proclamation in John 7:37-38, where He offers "rivers of living water" to those who believe in Him.
• The Bright Morning Star (v. 16): This title for Jesus connects to the promise given to the church in Thyatira (Revelation 2:28) and echoes messianic prophecy (Numbers 24:17). It symbolizes hope and the dawn of a new, eternal day.

The "Now But Not Yet" Application

This passage powerfully embodies the "now but not yet" tension of Christian eschatology.

• The "Now": The blessings of the New Covenant are presently available. The invitation to "come" and take the "water of life without price" is extended now (v. 17). Through the Spirit, believers experience a foretaste of God's presence and the healing of the gospel. We are now called to "wash our robes" (v. 14) through faith in Christ's atoning work and to live righteously in anticipation of His return.
• The "Not Yet": The full reality described—the physical river, the tree of life, the abolition of night, and the direct, unmediated vision of God's face—is still future. We still live in a world where evil exists (v. 11), and we await the final coming of Christ to fully establish this perfect order. The repeated cry, "I am coming soon" (vv. 7, 12, 20), creates a posture of active and hopeful waiting.

Study Questions

1. Compare the "river of the water of life" (Rev. 22:1) with the river in Eden (Genesis 2:10) and Ezekiel's vision (Ezekiel 47:1-9). What does this progression tell us about God's plan for restoration?
2. The "tree of life" offers healing for the nations. How does this universal scope of salvation contrast with the exclusive nature of Old Testament Israel and align with God's promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:3?
3. Why do nations need healing in heaven, if there is no curse anymore? (c.f. vv. 2-3).
4. What is the significance of God's servants seeing His face (Rev. 22:4), especially in light of Exodus 33:20-23 and Matthew 5:8? How does this speak to the ultimate goal of redemption?
5. In Revelation 22:11, the angel makes a startling statement about letting people continue in their state. How does this relate to the concept of hardened hearts in Exodus (e.g., Pharaoh) and Paul's teaching in Romans 1:24-28?
6. Jesus identifies Himself as "the Alpha and the Omega" (Rev. 22:13). How does this claim, paired with His title "the first and the last" in Revelation 1:17, establish His divine authority and eternality?
7. Revelation 22:14-15 presents a clear distinction between those inside and outside the city. How does this final judgment reflect the teachings of Jesus in, for example, Matthew 25:31-46?
8. What does Jesus mean in verse 16 that he is the root and descendant of David?
9. The invitation in Revelation 22:17 is extended by the Spirit, the Bride (the Church), and "the one who hears." How does this model evangelism, and how does it connect to the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20?
10. The warning against adding to or taking away from the prophecy (Rev. 22:18-19) is severe. What does this tell us about the gravity and finality of God's revealed Word? Compare this to Deuteronomy 4:2 and Proverbs 30:6.
11. The plea "Come, Lord Jesus!" (Rev. 22:20) is the cry of the early church (1 Corinthians 16:22). What is the relationship between this eager expectation and the call to holy living found in 2 Peter 3:11-14?
12. The final verse (Rev. 22:21) ends the entire Bible with a focus on "grace." How does this conclusion serve as a perfect bookend to the message of the New Testament, particularly the teachings of Paul in Ephesians 2:8-9?