Eternal Perspectives

The first post in this series started with an exploration of what constituted biblical grounds for divorce in NT times. The accepted grounds for divorce in the first century C.E., which provide the background for Jesus’Â’ interaction with the Pharisees on the subject, were four: adultery, provision of food, provision of clothing, and conjugal rights. This post will examine our Lord’Â’s teachings on the issues of marriage, divorce, and remarriage.

The key teachings of Jesus on the subject of divorce are found in the accounts of His conflict with the Pharisees in Mt 19 and Mk 10, with additional information gleaned from Mt 5:

Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESHÂ’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

They *said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?” He *said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery” – Mt 19.3-9 (NASB)

Some Pharisees came up to Jesus, testing Him, and began to question Him whether it was lawful for a man to divorce a wife. And He answered and said to them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses permitted a man TO WRITE A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY.”

But Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

In the house the disciples began questioning Him about this again. And He *said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery” – Mk 10.2-12 (NASB)

“It was said, ‘WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCEÂ’; but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery” – Mt 5.31-32 (NASB)

The first post in this series provided the historical context for this exchange between the three parties involved in the discussion: the School of Hillel granted divorces for “any matter” and the School of Shammai for “a matter of indecency.” Both based their position on their understanding of Deu 24.1. The two schools of Pharisaic thought came to Jesus to hear Him on the matter.

(In passing, it may be noted that the reason Matthew provides the clarifying phrase “for any reason at all” [19.3] while Mark does not is likely because MarkÂ’s audience did not need the clarification. The naked question, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”, would have been foolish: the Old Testament clearly provided stipulations and situations wherein divorce was allowed. Mark’Â’s readers would have automatically thought “for any reason” if the writer had omitted it; Matthew simply states the obvious.)

The temptation to which Matthew refers might have been designed to have Jesus fall into the same trap that caught John the Baptist. John had been imprisoned and beheaded for saying that Herod’Â’s divorce and remarriage were illegitimate; it is possible that the Pharisees hoped Jesus would similarly condemn Herod, be arrested, and at least imprisoned.

Mark records that Jesus responded to the PhariseesÂ’ initial question with one of His own: what did Moses command? He may have had Gen 1.28 or 2.24 in mind, since both of these verses refer to marriage and are commands; this seems to be the case given His reply to His own question (vv. 6-9). At least one of the groups of Pharisees reveals their misunderstanding of the Scriptures by their reply: they state that Moses commanded divorce (Mt 19.7); this may have been the school of Hillel, which seemed pro-divorce in its interpretation. The school of Shammai, on the other hand, may have been those who responded that Moses allowed for divorce (Mk 10.4).

It was believed by most people at the time that divorce was not optional but compulsory in the case of adultery. This is likely why Joseph is described as a righteous man when he considered divorcing Mary upon learning of her pregnancy. Instone-Brewer explains,

“”It was considered very suspect when a man refused to divorce his unfaithful wife, which is why Joseph is described as righteous for wanting to divorce Mary, who appeared to be unfaithful (Mt 1.19) . . . even a case of technical adultery was treated with severe penalties. Perhaps the reason for this was the possibility that adultery could produce illegitimate children.””

Jesus quickly corrects the Pharisees regarding MosesÂ’ command and explains that the reason Moses allowed divorce was due to hardness of heart, i.e., the stubborn refusal of the offending spouse to respond to the confrontations of the leaders (who served as judges) and repent. It is not unreasonable to assume, although it is not stated in the text either, that hard-heartedness could also be found in the offended party who refused to forgive the repentant spouse.

In a debate about divorce, it is not without significance that the first thing that Jesus does is teach about God’Â’s original and continuing intention for marriage: it is meant to be lifelong and it is hardness of heart that threatens the continuance of the relationship.

Because both the crowd and the Pharisees were familiar with the issues involved in the debate, Instone-Brewer suggests that much in Jesus’Â’ argument was abbreviated. Two thousand years later, what was known to the Pharisees and the crowd is somewhat obscure to readers of the gospels. Instone-Brewer provides an expanded reading:

““From the beginning of creation, ‘He made them male and femaleÂ’ (Gen 1.27), and those who entered [NoahÂ’'s] ark ‘went in two by two . . . into the ark, male and femaleÂ’ (Gen 7.9). When taken together, these texts show that God created human males and females in pairs. Scripture also says: ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh, and the two were naked, the man and the womanÂ’ (Gen 2.24-25). This shows that they have been joined by God. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.””

Whereas the Pharisees were concerned with what was allowable, Jesus was focused on what was desirable: marriage as a lifelong commitment and relationship between a man and a woman.

“”Both partners should do all they can to make sure that their marriage survives. This means that both partners should take care to fulfill their marriage vows, but also that they should be ready to forgive a partner who breaks the marriage vows and subsequently repents.””

In answering the question posed by the Pharisees, Jesus declares that an invalid divorce followed by remarriage is adultery. Remarriage is not the problem; rather, it is the unwarranted and unbiblical divorce that is the cause of the adultery. But, as Mark records our LordÂ’’s statement, Jesus goes further and makes an additional, corrective declaration.

“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her,”” Jesus said, ““and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.”

This is a remarkable announcement: while everyone knew that the woman would be considered an adulterer, no one would have regarded the man as one. As discussed in the first post of this series, it was technically impossible for a man to commit adultery since polygamy was allowed for men under the law. But Jesus changes this: just as a woman who remarried following an invalid divorce was guilty of adultery, so too was the man who divorced without biblical reasons and then remarried. This was a major corrective to a distortion of GodÂ’’s original purpose and design for marriage.

Instone-Brewer finds six specific teachings of Jesus that can be drawn from this exchange with the Pharisees:

• “Monogamy – an individual can be married to only one person at a time.
• “Marriage should be life long – and it is against God’Â’s will to break up a marriage.
• “Divorce is not compulsory – even in cases of adultery.
• “Divorce is allowable – if there is a stubborn refusal to stop committing adultery.
• “Marriage is not compulsory – so infertility is not a ground for divorce.
• “Divorce for ‘any matterÂ’ is invalid – and so remarriage after this divorce is adulterous.

Next: The Teaching of Paul