Divorce Is Good Sometimes

Most of us wish divorce were never necessary. I certainly do. Marriage was meant to be loving, undefiled, protective, and lifelong.

But sometimes a covenant that was meant for protection becomes a place of bondage. And when that happens, escape can be good.

• Deliverance can be good.
• Redemption can be good.

That is why I think the title “Divorce is Good Sometimes” matters.

Not every divorce is good. Some divorces are selfish, reckless, or cruel. But some divorces are the only way to stop abuse, betrayal, coercive control, abandonment, or danger. Some divorces protect the innocent. Some divorces save lives.

I recently read two fascinating articles by rancher Joseph J. Pote that helped me think more deeply about covenants, bondage, redemption, and divorce. Joe writes, “Divorce is sometimes the best and most godly course of action.” And he backs that theologically and biblically.

I encourage you to read his articles on covenant and redemption directly:

• Joseph J. Pote on how God redeemed and delivered the Israelites from slavery in Egypt when Pharaoh broke covenant
• Joseph J. Pote on David’s covenant ties to King Saul, who tried to kill him

His ideas may be new to many readers, as they were to me, so let me give a brief introduction.

What Happens When a Covenant Become Bondage?

Many Christians think of covenant as something that can never be ended. But in the Bible, covenants are serious agreements involving promises and obligations. (God made 7 covenants: 2 conditional and 5 unconditional.) A covenant between two humans can be holy, protective, and life-giving. But when one party becomes treacherous, cruel, or oppressive, that covenant can become dangerous bondage.

That distinction matters.

A marriage begins as a valid covenant in most cases. Two people make vows of love, honor, faithfulness, care, and protection. But if one spouse turns the marriage into a system of abuse, coercive control, terror, abandonment, or betrayal, the innocent spouse is not the one who destroyed the covenant. The covenant has already been violated.

This is where Pote’s discussion of Israel’s exodus from Egypt is so thought-provoking.

Israel’s relationship with Egypt began as provision and protection through Joseph. Pharaoh gave Joseph honor, authority, land, food, clothing, a new name, and even his own signet ring. Joseph, in turn, served Pharaoh faithfully and administered Pharaoh’s kingdom. In the Bible, these are signs of a covenant. They are valuable, rich in symbolism, and convey authority and power.

But later, a new king arose over Egypt, who did not know Joseph (Exodus 1:8). That Pharaoh did not honor the earlier relationship of protection. He enslaved Joseph’s descendants.

What began as refuge became bondage.

This is painfully familiar to abuse survivors. A relationship may begin with love, affection, promises, shelter, and spiritual language. But over time, it may become domination. The person who promised protection becomes the person creating danger.

The chart below helps us see the movement from protection to oppression, and from covenant blessing to covenant betrayal.

So what did God do for Israel?

“I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from their bondage. I will also redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments.” — Exodus 6:6

• Deliverance is rescue from danger. Deliverance is good.
• Redemption is release from obligation. Redemption is good.

The Exodus gives us one picture of God rescuing his people from covenant bondage.

Not just escape, but release from the covenant

Joseph Pote’s point is especially interesting here. God could have simply removed Israel from Egypt by force. But over and over, Moses is sent to Pharaoh asking him to let Israel go. Why involve Pharaoh at all? Pote argues that God was doing more than rescuing Israel from danger. He was also bringing about their rightful release from Egypt’s claim over them.

Exodus 6:1 says, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh; for under compulsion he will let them go, and under compulsion he will drive them out of his land.” When Pharaoh finally drove Israel out, Egypt’s claim was broken. Israel did not merely escape; they were released. They left with no remaining allegiance, debt, or obligation to Pharaoh.

That is why the language of deliverance and redemption matters. Deliverance got Israel out of danger. Redemption ended Egypt’s claim. In Pote’s words, Israel was divorced from Egypt.

Pharaoh’s “letting go” should never be twisted into a rule that victims need an abuser’s permission to leave. The point is not that Pharaoh had righteous authority over Israel; the point is that God broke Pharaoh’s claim. Abusers often refuse to release their victims. That refusal does not make the victim morally bound. It only reveals why deliverance and redemption are necessary.

An Analogy

Imagine someone trapped in a fraudulent business partnership. One kind of help would be getting them safely out of the room where they are being threatened. That is deliverance. But they also need the contract dissolved so the abusive partner cannot keep claiming their money, labor, name, and loyalty. That is redemption.

That is why this biblical picture is so powerful. God did not merely help Israel run away from Egypt. He broke Pharaoh’s claim over them. They left owing Egypt no loyalty, allegiance, or debt.

That gives us a biblical category many churches have missed:

Sometimes the end of a covenant is not rebellion.

Sometimes it is rescue.

Sometimes it is justice.

Sometimes it is redemption from bondage.

This does not make covenant unimportant. Quite the opposite. It means covenant is so important that God takes covenant treachery seriously.

So yes, divorce is tragic. Divorce is painful. Divorce is not what any faithful person dreams of on their wedding day.

But divorce is good sometimes

• It is good when it stops abuse.
• It is good when it protects children.
• It is good when it releases someone from coercion, terror, abandonment, or betrayal.
• It is good when it ends bondage.

If your spouse has turned the marriage covenant into bondage, you are not wrong for wanting deliverance. And you are not wrong for needing redemption from the obligations of a covenant your abuser has already shattered.

God sees bondage.

God hears cries.

God redeems His people

A note about the word covenant: Joseph Pote is making an inferential covenant argument because it has all the hallmarks of a ancient Middle Eastern covenant. He is not saying Genesis uses the phrase “made a covenant” for Joseph and Pharaoh. Rather, he is observing a pattern consistent with a formal agreement: Pharaoh gives Joseph authority, signet-ring power, provision, protection, land for his family, and a new name—strong covenant-like markers. They clearly had a mutually beneficial understanding that lasted for many years. Exodus 1:8 then says the later Pharaoh “did not know Joseph,” which helps explain why that protective relationship was broken and turned into oppression. I strongly recommend reading Pote’s full explanation in the link near the top of this post, especially his discussion of why Pharaoh’s agreement was sought before Israel was released.

Recommended reading

• Open Letter to Russell Moore: Why Some Divorces Are Acts of Biblical Deliverance
• Divorce vs. Legal Separation for Abuse Victims: What Christians Need to Know
• “Why Didn’t You Just Leave?” 50 Abused Wives & Husbands Explain
• For Christians who identify as “Reformed”: Wayne Grudem Supports Divorce and Remarriage after Abuse, Adultery, Abandonment
• Hosea Is Not a Marriage Manual for Betrayed Spouses