On divorce Part 3

Update: Last post in the series – Part 8 Actual Final

---

This post is mainly for consolidating the Scriptures on divorce as I’ve participated in several conversations lately on the same topic.  It covers much of the same material as the previous topics On divorce and On divorce Part 2. Thus, if you’ve read them before or if you don’t care feel free not to read it again.

This is one of the original research articles that got me started on reading to understand what the Scriptures say myself. Read it if you have time.

The biggest thing that I learned from my discussions is that people don’t properly understand the background of all of the OT passages on divorce and putting away which set the stage for why Jesus is talking specifically about putting away and not divorce. Hence, I am going to lay them out in a coherent way that allows us to discuss the context for which Jesus speaks about these things to the Pharisees.

Table of contents

1. Deuteronomy 24 — What is legal divorce according to the Scriptures?
2. Deuteronomy 22 — What constitutes marital fraud?
3. Jeremiah 3 and Isaiah 50 — The adulterous cases of Israel and Judah
4. Malachi 2 — the background from the Old Testament to the New Testament
5. Deuteronomy 24 and Matthew 5 and 19 — The synonymous terms of legal divorce in the OT and NT
6. Matthew 19:3 — the Pharisees’ multi layered trap
7. Matthew 19:4-6 — Jesus goes back to the creation
8. Matthew 19:7 — The Pharisees’ confusion
9. Matthew 19:8 — Jesus’ response on hardness of heart
10. Matthew 19:9 — The heavily misinterpreted passage of Scripture
11. Matthew 19:10-12 — the disciples actually understand the gravity of marriage
12. Matthew 1:18-19 — the case of Joseph and Mary
13. Mark 10:2-12 and Luke 16:13-18 — the unification of Matthew with Mark and Luke
14. Romans 7 — understanding the context of Jewish divorce
15. 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 — the Lord’s command to husbands and wives
16. 1 Corinthians 7:12-15 — Paul, not the Lord, says to live with unbelieving spouses
17. Conclusion

Let’s get started.

Deuteronomy 24 — What is legal divorce according to the Scriptures?

This is outlined in Deuteronomy 24:

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement (sêpher kerı̂ythûth), and give it in her hand, and send (shâlach) her out of his house. 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement (sêpher kerı̂ythûth), and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth (shâlach) her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

Legal divorce is composed of two parts in the OT covenant.

1. Sepher keriythth — Writing and giving the wife a bill of divorcement.
2. Shalach — Sending her out of the house or away.

This will be important when we look at the passages in Matthew.

Deuteronomy 22 — What constitutes marital fraud?

Marital fraud is found in Deuteronomy 22.

Deuteronomy 22:13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, 14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:

15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: 16 And the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her; 17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. 18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him; 19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away (shâlach) all his days.

20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: 21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

From a historical perspective very few if any women that were caught in marital fraud were actually stoned.

Thus, what actually occurred is that when a woman was caught in marital fraud were simply put away without being legally divorced. The reason for this is that such a fraudulent marriage was invalid, and the couple was not legally married. Hence, the “wife” could be put away because there was no proof of the marriage due to lack of blood on the sheets which illuminated her deception that she wasn’t a virgin.

Distinguishing legal divorce from marital fraud is important because this outlines a case for which a woman could be put away.

Jeremiah 3 and Isaiah 50 — The adulterous cases of Israel and Judah

The Lord is shown to follow the laws he outlined in Deuteronomy 24 for legal divorce in the cases of Israel and Judah.

Jeremiah 3:6 The Lord said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen that which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up upon every high mountain and under every green tree, and there hath played the harlot. 7 And I said after she had done all these things, Turn thou unto me. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it. 8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away (shâlach), and given her a bill of divorce (sêpher kerı̂ythûth); yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also. 9 And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks. 10 And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the Lord.

This is one of the reasons why Israel was not brought back out of Assyrian captivity, and why Samaritans were treated like garbage by the Jews. They were no longer “Jews” because they have been divorced by God. This passage in Jeremiah 3 shows that God Himself divorces the Israelites, gives her a bill of divorce, and sends/puts her away into Assyrian captivity. God abides by His own law that He gave the Israelites.

However, the Lord speaking to Judah does not divorce her even though He puts her away. This means that the Lord is still married to Judah which fulfills His promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as well as David that he will always have a descendant sit on the throne.

Isaiah 50:1 Thus saith the Lord [to Judah], Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement (sêpher ‘êm kerı̂ythûth), whom I have put away (shâlach)? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away (shâlach). 2 Wherefore, when I came, was there no man? when I called, was there none to answer? Is my hand shortened at all, that it cannot redeem? or have I no power to deliver? behold, at my rebuke I dry up the sea, I make the rivers a wilderness: their fish stinketh, because there is no water, and dieth for thirst. 3 I clothe the heavens with blackness, and I make sackcloth their covering.

In the case of Judah, we know that Jesus comes from the lineage of Judah and David. The Lord allows Judah to be put away into captivity for their transgressions. Afterward, He redeems and deliveIf rs Judah out of captivity as read in Nehemiah and Ezra and upholds  His covenant with them through the rebuilding of His temple. Then He brings full redemption to them through sending His Son Jesus to die bring forth the New Covenant.

Malachi 2 — The background from the Old Testament to the New Testament

Malachi is the last prophet for 400 years before Jesus. In particular, Malachi points out Israelite backsliding due to assimilation of the surrounding cultures much like today.

Malachi 2:14 Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the Lord hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant. 15 And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.

16 For the Lord, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away (shâlach): for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the Lord of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously. 17 Ye have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment?

The main background behind this passage is that “divorce” in surrounding cultures was simply putting away. Husbands sent their wives out of the house and that was a divorce. As you can see, this “divorce” of putting away is at conflict with the Israelite legal divorce process which was putting away with a writ of divorce.

There are two main reasons why the Lord was saying putting away [without a writ of divorce] was treacherous:

1. The husbands were receiving cash and prizes from putting away. If a wife was legally divorced — put away with a writ of divorce — she would receive back the dowry that the bride’s father paid. However, if she was put away without a writ of divorce she would not receive back the dowry. Hence, Israelite husbands were following other cultures and not the Lord for selfish gain.
2. A legal divorce — put away with a writ of divorce — would allow the divorced wife to remarry. However, if a wife was put away she would not be able to remarry as it states in Deuteronomy 24. Instead, she would still be legally married to her husband albeit put away like Judah in captivity. Since the husbands were not going to redeem the wives they had put away they were left destitute because they could not remarry without committing adultery.

This assimilation of the surrounding culture sets the stage for Jesus’ interaction with the Pharisees in the New Testament.

Deuteronomy 24 and Matthew 5 and 19 — The synonymous terms of legal divorce in the OT and NT

Since the OT was written in Hebrew and the NT was written primarily in Greek, we need to critically examine the Scriptures to see if there are synonymous terms that were used in order to understand if the Pharisees and Jesus were speaking about the Law of Moses. There are.

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement (sêpher kerı̂ythûth), and give it in her hand, and send (shâlach) her out of his house. 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement (sêpher kerı̂ythûth), and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth (shâlach) her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

1. Sepher keriythth — Writing and giving the wife a bill of divorcement.
2. Shalach — Sending her out of the house or away.

Matthew 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement (apostasion): 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, saving for the cause of fornication (porneia), causeth her to commit adultery (moichaō): and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced (apoluō) committeth adultery (moichaō).

[…]

Matthew 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away (apoluō) his wife for every cause? 4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement (apostasion), and to put her away (apoluō autos)? 8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away (apoluō) your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, except it be for fornication (porneia), and shall marry another,commit adultery (moichaō): and whoso marrieth her which is put away (apoluō) doth committeth adultery (moichaō).

G630 — ἀπολύω — apoluō — ap-ol-oo’-o
From G575 and G3089; to free fully, that is, (literally) relieve, release, dismiss (reflexively depart), or (figuratively) let die, pardon, or (specifically) divorce: – (let) depart, dismiss, divorce, forgive, let go, loose, put (send) away, release, set at liberty.

G647 — ἀποστάσιον — apostasion — ap-os-tas’-ee-on
Neuter of a (presumed) adjective from a derivative of G868; properly something separative, that is, (specifically) divorce: – (writing of) divorcement.

1. GREEK Apostasion and HEBREW Sepher keriythth — Writing and giving the wife a bill of divorcement.
2. GREEK Apoluo and HEBREW Shalach — Sending her out of the house or away.

Note: I crossed out the two instances of “divorce” within the definition of apoluo because apoluo does not denote a legal divorce according to the Law of Moses. Hence, Jesus would not have used apoluo to mean “divorce” because He does not abolish the law but fulfills the law.

Matthew 19:3 — the Pharisees’ multi layered trap

Let’s start delving into the line by line analysis given our solid background of understanding.

Matthew 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away (apoluō) his wife for every cause?

First, the key word “every cause” is another instance of background that we need to understand the situation correctly. The Pharisees, specifically the Hillelites, claimed you could legally divorce for “every cause” due to an interpretation of uncleanness in Deuteronomy 24 meaning any form of displeasure. (The article in question gets the conclusion wrong, but the background is important).

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement (sêpher kerı̂ythûth), and give it in her hand, and send (shâlach) her out of his house.

Now, your spider senses should be tingling because that question is not what the Pharisees actually asked. This is the importance of understanding that a divorce in Jewish law is putting away AND a bill of divorcement.

They did not ask Jesus:

“Is it lawful for a man to put away (apoluō) [and give a writ of divorce (apostasion)] his wife for every cause?”

but rather

“Is it lawful for a man to put away (apoluō) his wife for every cause?”

If they had said “divorce” via put away + writ of divorce it would have been a basic trap that they knew Jesus could easily refute. However, this multi layered trap is complicated and goes back to it’s roots of being called out by God’s prophet in Malachi 2. Israelite husbands were assimilating culture by putting away their wives treacherously for selfish gain (cash and prizes) and leaving them unable to remarry lest they commit adultery.

The complexity of this trap question is that the Pharisees are pitting Roman law — the current occupiers of the land — versus a specific interpretation of Jewish law. In Roman law you could “divorce” your wife by “putting her away” (apoluo). However, as we know in Jewish law in Deuteronomy 24 you could divorce your wife by “putting her away” (apoluo or shalach) AND giving her a bill of divorcement (Apostasion or Sepher keriythth). This is similar to other traps the Pharisees employed such as it being lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or God (Matt 22, Mark 12).

Hence, the trap. If Jesus answers that you can put away a wife without a bill of divorcement the Pharisees can call Jesus a blasphemer as He is not following Jewish law. If Jesus says that you need a bill of divorcement then the Pharisees can take Jesus to the Romans and say that He is subverting Roman law. The additional part of the trap that is subtle is that “every cause” is thrown in so that they are not referring directly to Jewish law but solely one liberal interpretation of it.

Obviously, this is a no win question, so the only right answer is not to play at all.

Matthew 19:4-6 — Jesus goes back to the creation

Jesus knows that it’s a no-win question. Hence, He doesn’t play.

Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Jesus neatly sidesteps the Pharisees’ trap by avoiding talking about Roman and Jewish law and instead discusses the creation of man and what God intended. He would know because He was there in the beginning (see: John 1:1-4).

Matthew 19:7 — The Pharisees’ confusion

Matthew 19:7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement (apostasion), and to put her away (apoluō autos)?

The Pharisees see that Jesus has cleverly sidestepped their trap. However, they now are not a bit confused. If God did not intended for any divorce at all then why was it written in the Law of Moses in Deuteronomy 24 that they can divorce by putting the wife away AND giving her a bill of divorcement?

The fact that the Pharisees readily acknowledge that the Law of Moses declared that a divorce is composed of putting away AND bill of divorcement allows us to understand that the prior exegesis of the “trap” set by the Pharisees as indicated by Matthew is correct. The Pharisees were again pitting Roman Law against Jewish Law trying to make Him break one or the other along with throwing in their “every cause” theology.

Remember, they asked “put away” versus “put away with a writ of divorce.”

Matthew 19:8 — Jesus’ response of hardness of heart

Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away (apoluō) your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

Jesus responds to the Pharisees that this part of the law was created because human hearts are hard.

This does not mean that putting away (or apoluo) is synonymous with divorce. Rather, it means that Jesus doesn’t want “putting away” for any reason valid divorce or not because of the hardness of hearts. However, at best this is the only portion of the Scriptures where Jesus refers to “putting away” as all inclusive of divorce.

Next, Jesus goes on to talk about the only valid reason for putting away and not a reason for divorce.

Matthew 19:9 — The heavily misinterpreted passage of Scripture

Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, except it be for fornication (porneia), and shall marry another, commit adultery (moichaō): and whoso marrieth her which is put away (apoluō) doth committeth adultery (moichaō).

The first thing to realize is that Jesus is answering the original question that the Pharisees posed which is namely “what are the lawful instances of which you can put away?”

Matthew 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away (apoluō) his wife for every cause?

As we remember from Malachi 2 to the current Roman occupation the Israelite husbands were putting away their wives treacherously. Thus, it is important for Jesus to answer this question in order to clarify the instances of which a wife can be put away… not the instances for which a wife can be divorced.

Let’s walk through this part by part:

1. Specifically, Jesus starts off with “Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife.” Again, putting away is not synonymous with divorce as Jewish law is 2 parts: putting away and giving a bill of divorcement.

We recognize that Jesus knows what a bill of divorce is as He is familiar with Jewish law. Additionally,  the Pharisees just asked him about putting away (apoluo) and bills of divorce (apostasion). Hence, Jesus is only talking about the specific scenario of putting away a wife WITHOUT a bill of divorcement otherwise He would have clarified.

Next:

1. Jesus specifically says “except it be for fornication (porneia). “Fornication” is an illicit sexual union including incest (1 Cor 5) and includes adultery. However, if Jesus was referring specifically to adultery here then “moichao” would have been used instead of “porneia.” Moichao is used in the same sentence, yet it is not used here.
2. Additionally, in combination with “putting away (apoluo)” and “fornication (porneia)” this tells us that He is referring to Deuteronomy 22 where a husband marries a wife who is not a virgin by fraud. If it was talking about “putting away (apoluo)” and “bill of divorcement (apostasion)” and “adultery (moichiao)” this would reference Deuteronomy 24 on rules of divorce.

The Greek wording is extremely important to look at here because it tells us what Jesus is talking about and what He is not talking about. This wording absolutely denies that Jesus is talking about divorce and legitimacy of divorce due to adultery in Deuteronomy 24 and instead refers marriage fraud like in Deuteronomy 22.

If Jesus was talking specifically about a legitimate divorce for adultery he would have instead said:

“Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) [with a writ of divorce (apostasion)] his wife, “except it be for adultery (moichiao),

Instead, He says:

“Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, “except it be for fornication (porneia),

This becomes clear in the final part.

Next, Jesus says: “and shall marry another, commit adultery (moichaō): and whoso marrieth her which is put away (apoluō) doth committeth adultery (moichaō).” Let’s put all of the parts together now.

Remove the “except” part for a moment. Jesus is saying:

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, except it be for fornication (porneia), and shall marry another, commit adultery (moichaō): and whoso marrieth her which is put away (apoluō) doth committeth adultery (moichaō).

Simplified:

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, […], and shall marry another, commit adultery (moichaō): and whoso marrieth her which is put away (apoluō) doth committeth adultery (moichaō).

1. In other words, Jesus is saying [under Jewish law] that if you put away your wife and marry another each of you commit adultery. This makes sense because if you put away your wife under Jewish law without giving her a writ of divorce then you commit adultery as you were still married to her! This is where Jesus refers to Deuteronomy 24 specifically on the laws of divorce.
2. As you can see, this directly resembles what was exactly happening in Malachi 2 and Roman times. Husbands were putting away their wives without a writ of divorce. They couldn’t marry because they were still married to their original husbands. If they did they were committing adultery.

Let’s continue the textual analysis:

1. Now, what about the “except it be for fornication (porneia)” part? The Pharisees rightly understood that in Deuteronomy 22 that if a husband accused his wife of not being a virgin then the proof was the sheet with the blood stains on it. If the parents were able to produce that (gross, I know) then the husband must pay a penalty and could never put her away as long as he lives. However, if the wife was guilty she was committing fraud by lying/deception by marrying her husband claiming to be a virgin when she was not.
2. Therefore, this “except” clause means that a husband COULD put away a wife if she had committed deception by fraud by claiming to be a virgin when she was not. Indeed, there is no covenant marriage formed between the husband and the wife if she fraudulently married.
3. Hence, a husband can “lawfully” put away his wife for that cause under Jewish law. This bring us full circle to the fact that Jesus fully answered the Pharisees’ question. Under Jewish law a husband can put away his wife [without a bill of divorcement] if she had fornicated and deceived him that she was a virgin as there was no lawful marriage in the first place. Hence, he can put her away and it is not a divorce.

Thus,

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, except it be for fornication (porneia) [illicit/fraudulent sexual deception which forms an invalid marriage], and shall marry another, commit adultery (moichaō): and whoso marrieth her which is put away (apoluō) doth committeth adultery (moichaō).

Putting away (without a writ of divorce) and marrying another constitutes adultery because you are still married to your former spouse. The exception is for a fraudulent marriage which means the marriage itself is invalid.

Now that we understand that Jesus was not talking about divorce (putting away + writ of divorce) but rather putting away we also understand that his original statement still stands.

Matthew 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Thus, Jesus says there is no divorce period. Any divorce is sin.

This also describes the only reason you can put away a wife is for a fraudulent marriage. For example, a wife that lies about her past sexual history can be put away because it’s a fraudulent marriage. A covenant must be willingly agreed to openly and truthfully.

Matthew 19:10-12 — the disciples actually understand the gravity of marriage

Matthew 19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

1. The disciples, despite how they are often mocked at not understanding things, readily understand that Jesus is saying that there is no divorce period. The only exception is that you can put away a wife if she fornicated prior to marriage as there would have been no covenant marriage formed.
2. Hence, they say that it’s better not to marry since it would be a bad deal to marry if you couldn’t divorce for any reason.
3. Jesus then responds that only some can receive the gift of singleness without women. This is important to note in the context of 1 Corinthians 7, and Paul’s concession that it’s better to marry than to burn. Both Jesus and Paul under the inspiration of the Father understand that many will marry because singleness has not been given to everyone.

No divorce period except for fraudulent marriages is a hard word indeed.

Matthew 1:18-19 — the case of Joseph and Mary

This also agrees with Matthew 1:19 where Joseph was going to put Mary away.

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus [r]Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been [s]betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. 19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.

Joseph marriage with Mary would have been fraudulent because he was marrying a virgin. To him Mary was not a virgin because she was with child. It took an angel of God to convince him otherwise.

Mark 10:2-12 and Luke 16:13-18 — the unification of Matthew with Mark and Luke

 In Mark 10:

Mark 10:2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away (apoluō) his wife? tempting him. 3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? 4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement (apostasion), and to put her away (apoluō autos). 5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. 6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. 11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away (apoluō) his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery (moichaō) against her. 12 And if a woman shall put away (apoluō) her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery (moichaō).

And also in Luke 16:

Luke 16:13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. 14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him. 15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. 16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. 17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

18 Whosoever putteth away (apoluō) his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery (moichaō): and whosoever marrieth her that is put away (apoluō) from her husband committeth adultery (moichaō).

The background behind these passages is that Mark and Luke were mainly written to the Gentiles while Matthew was written to the Hebrews. Thus, there is no “except for fornication” within these two passages when Jesus repeats the same thing in Matthew.

The reason for this is that since “putting away” was “divorce” for the Gentiles they should not do that at all. As they were not under the Law of Moses, this goes back to Jesus statement of original intention: “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” There is no divorce for  Gentile believers.

Romans 7 — understanding the context of Jewish divorce

Romans 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Romans 7 does not speak specifically about whether you can legally divorce or not. Obviously, Deuteronomy 24, which Paul is quite familiar with being a Pharisee of Pharisees, states that husbands could divorce their wives.

Paul is instead speaking to the scenarios of being unbound by the law (in death) more than about divorce because He is discussing our salvation and grace versus works. In particular, husbands were allowed to divorce their wives in Deuteronomy 24; however, wives were not allowed to divorce their husbands. Hence, when Paul speaks to this scenario a wife is bound by the law to her husband until he dies [or he divorces her which didn’t comment about in this passage].

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 — the Lord’s command to husbands and wives

The Lord speaks through Paul:

1 Corinthians 7:10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart (chōrizō) from her husband: 11 But and if she depart (chōrizō), let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away (aphiēmi) his wife.

G5563 — χωρίζω — chōrizō — kho-rid’-zo
From G5561; to place room between, that is, part; reflexively to go away: – depart, put asunder, separate.

G863 — ἀφίημι — aphiēmi — af-ee’-ay-mee
From G575 and ἵημι hiēmi (to send; an intensive form of εἶμι eimi (to go)); to send forth, in various applications: – cry, forgive, forsake, lay aside, leave, let (alone, be, go, have), omit, put (send) away, remit, suffer, yield up.

G630 — ἀπολύω — apoluō — ap-ol-oo’-o
From G575 and G3089; to free fully, that is, (literally) relieve, release, dismiss (reflexively depart), or (figuratively) let die, pardon, or (specifically) divorce: – (let) depart, dismiss, divorce, forgive, let go, loose, put (send) away, release, set at liberty.

It’s important to understand that the Lord is speaking to a Roman/Greek population in the Corinthians here and not the Jewish people. Hence, the Lord is speaking against the Roman law that “divorce” could be done through “putting away” or simply “departing” in the case of the wife.

Likewise, the Lord follows this up with the only correct path for those separated or divorced: stay single or reconcile. This is a hard word for most Christians because divorce and remarriage is not an option.

This agrees with Jesus’ original statements on divorce: “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

This also provides evidence against that Jesus was not speaking about divorce but rather putting away. Hence, Jesus did not say that you could divorce your wife if she committed adultery. Jesus and the Father are one, and they are in agreement.

1 Corinthians 7:12-15 — Paul, not the Lord, says to live with unbelieving spouses

1 Corinthians 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put away (aphiēmi autos). 13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him (aphiēmi autos). 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart (chōrizō), let him depart (chōrizō). A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

This passage is also used as a so-called exception clause for remarriage. “Well, if I’m not under bondage anymore because my unbelieving wife or husband left me then I can remarry.” That is not what this passage says at all. It only says that if they depart then you’re not under the bondage of the marriage anymore. However, it does not necessarily condone remarriage either. In fact, going back to the earlier part of 1 Corinthians 7 it would be best to stay single or reconcile if at all possible.

Overall, it’s not specifically clear so there is the possible that you are lawfully allowed to remarry. Although if this is the case I would personally recommend staying single.

Conclusions

Jesus is discusses instances of putting away (not divorce). Thus, His comments are able to be unified throughout all of the passages in Scriptures on putting away and divorce.

1. Putting away is NOT divorce in the context of Jewish law. It is a two part process of putting away and a bill of divorcement. – Deut 22, 24; Mal 2; Jer 3; Isa 50; Matt 5, 19; Mark 10; Luke 16
2. However, putting away is synonymous with divorce for the Gentiles. — Mark 10; Luke 16; 1 Corinthians 7
3. God and Jesus’ plan for marriage is that “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” – Gen 2, Matt 19; Mark 10
4. There is no get-out-of-marriage adultery clause. Who you are married to you should stay married to regardless of any sins they commit. This is a hard word as even the disciples said it was better not to marry. – Matt; 19, Mark 10, Luke 16
5. Under Jewish law according to Jesus: Your marriage is illegitimate if your wife committed sexual fraud. – Deut 22, Matthew 5, 19; Mark 10; Luke 16,
6. Under Jewish law: Wives are bound to their husbands as long as they live [or until their husbands divorce them which was not said]. – Rom 7, Deut 24
7. If a spouse leaves stay single or be reconciled. – 1 Cor 7
8. If an unbelieving spouse leaves you are not under bondage. This can still be liberally interpreted as being able to remarry; however, the prior part of the chapter tends to speak against it since it says to stay single or reconcile. Note the wording: “10 But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord … [remain unmarried or reconcile]” versus “12 But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if [they leave you are not under bondage].” I take this to generally mean that “not under bondage” means that you are absolved of your marriage duties, but given the context of the wording about the Lord saying versus Paul saying it would seem that stay unmarried or be reconciled is the ideal. Remarriage is likely not an option. – 1 Cor 7
9. Remarriage is a singular sin and not perpetual adultery This is one of the falsely propagated conclusions from the heretical “You can divorce your spouse if they commit adultery” exegesis. However, the act of remarriage is a sin since the ideal is to stay single or reconcile. The important thing to understand is that it is a singular sin and not a constant state of sin. Confess your sins to God and repent. – Matt 5, 19; Mark 10; Luke 16; 1 Cor 7 (See: Note 3 for more details)
10. Those already remarried in their second and third marriages are NOT to divorce and reconcile with their first spouse. This follows out of #8 because the heretical interpretation is perpetual adultery with the new spouse. Hence, divorce and reconcile and remarry with the first spouse. Rather, this view goes against what Deuteronomy 24 says in that if a first husband divorces a wife and another marries her even if she is divorced or her husband dies then she is not to remarry him again. – Deut 24, Matthew 19 (See: Note 3 for more details)

Overall, the main conclusions are:

1. No divorce period. Even for adultery. Your only recourse is separation if you absolutely can’t live with them.
2. If you are separated, stay single or reconcile. No remarriage.
3. Stay with an unbeliever if they want to live with you, otherwise you are not under the bonds of marriage.
4. Fraudulent marriages are not marriages.
5. While divorce and remarriage are two sins, they are not perpetual adultery. The phrasing “let man no separate” implies man can separate but it’s sinful because of deviation from original design. See: Deuteronomy 24 why divorce and remarriage is not perpetual adultery. Going back to the original spouse is an abomination to the Lord. (See: Note 3 for more details)
   

As you will note, this exegesis properly aligns with both (?) the Catholic and Orthodox perspective on marriage (although I haven’t studied all of the complexities of them so I’m not 100% sure). I would appreciate of the Catholic and Orthodox readers will comment on this. Most Protestant denominations are in heresy on the topic of divorce.

Also, for those of you who read this far can comment if this post is clearer than the originals I would appreciate it.

Note 1: This is one of the original research articles that got me started on reading to understand what the Scriptures say myself. Read it if you have time.

Note 2: Hopefully this is the last ever post I make on divorce. The logic and continuity of the Scriptures on this topic is clear that I need not revisit.

Note 3: Divorce, remarriage, and perpetual adultery I addressed in the comments. Essentially,

1. I agree with perpetual adultery if the participants are made completely aware of the roles and responsibilities and the everlasting nature of marriage. In other words, “sacramental marriage” affirmed by the Church.

2. However, those who were not made aware sinned in their ignorance. If I remember correctly those that don’t undergo the rites of the Church in the marriage ceremonies in both (?) Catholic and Orthodox tradition means that the marriage formed is potentially invalid. Hence, since the marriage wasn’t valid they are free to marry another.

3. This would also go along with the position that those in their 2nd or 3rd marriages and then come to Christ would not have to divorce and go back to their first spouse. They can get their current marriage affirmed by the Church with all of the details of the Covenant.

Conclusion:

By no means do I think this is optimal, but we live in a broken world so this is probably the best human solution for it given the nature of Covenants and legal contracts. You have to be aware of the details and willingly walk into them for them to be binding. If there is ignorance or fraud they are not binding.