Divorce and the Redeemed Purpose of Marriage

The text begins with a very important shift in Matthew’s story: Jesus leaves Galilee. Although this may seem inconsequential to most of us reading, if you know the whole story so far you know that Jesus’ ministry as recorded by Matthew has been almost exclusively in Galilee, with some short trips into the Decapolis and other gentile areas. Jesus is now leaving his main area of ministry and is on his way to Jerusalem. In other words, this is the beginning of Jesus’ last journey, a journey to Jerusalem where he will go to the cross.

As this journey begins, we see themes that have already been present develop further. Specifically, the miraculous works of Jesus showing him to be the Son of God and the conflict rising from the Pharisees and other religious leaders. In this section, Jesus will also begin to teach more on end times, preparing his disciples and all future disciples for the challenge that awaits them in the coming ages as the world wars against them and the suffering of the cross persists in the persecuted church. In all this, the expectation of glory after a life of fruitful service propels the disciples through the challenges to come as Christ approaches the cross.

In our text today, we see Jesus’ ministry of teaching and healing continues, and this ministry continues to be challenged by the Pharisees. This time, the topic is on divorce and the biblical view of marriage. Here we get more exposition on Jesus’ teaching on divorce back in 5:31-32, which we did not look at in depth but waited for this text to fully explore it.

A Challenge on Divorce

The motivation of the Pharisees is said to be a test for Jesus, although this is not a test given in a genuine spirit of faith but rather a test meant to trip Jesus up. As we will see, the Pharisees here try to uncover one of Jesus’ teachings that went against the widely accepted view of the day, hoping it would deal a blow to Jesus’ popularity. Perhaps it would even get Jesus in trouble with Herod, as John the Baptist’s rebuke of his unlawful marriage had done.

The Challenge of the Pharisees

The Pharisees disguise their challenge in two questions, one given in verse 3 and the other given in verse 7 after Jesus answers the first.

“Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” Both this and the follow-up question refer to Deuteronomy 24:1

Deuteronomy 24:1 ESV

“When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and she departs out of his house,

The key word here is indecency which had brought about much debate among the Jews. There were generally two different views of what indecency referred to. First, the Rabbi Shammai had taught that this referred to some gross offense or immorality on the part of the wife. This was the more conservative view, although Shammai still held that remarriage was open even for those who had gotten an unlawful divorce. On the other hand, the Rabbi Hillel had taken a much more liberal view of the text. He taught that indecency was anything, however minor, that displeased the husband. This included anything from the wife burning toast to a prettier woman catching his eye. In other words, indecency was interpreted to essentially mean anything the husband wanted it to mean if he wanted out of the marriage. Unfortunately, this was the majority view at the time. Knowing that Jesus had taught on this subject before, the Pharisees hope to get an unpopular opinion from Jesus and prove him wrong in the process.

When Jesus answers as they expect him to, they back up their initial challenge with the followup question: why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away? Notice the use of the word command compared to Jesus in verse 8 saying allowed. This will show us the inherent difference between how the two parties are approaching this part of the Law.

We do not know what the Pharisees’ reaction was to Jesus’ answer, but we will see their hatred of Jesus escalate in the coming chapters. Here, it is clear that they approach God’s law in such a way where they try to get around God’s plan rather than submit to it. They are great lawyer in God’s Word, but have no desire to know the true will of God. How many read the Scriptures like this, scouring for verses that agree with what they already think is true instead of reading the Bible for what it wants to tell us. This is what theologians call eisegesis and what I call reading the Bible with blinders on. The Bible is meant to change you, not affirm what you already believe. If we approach God’s Word with our minds already made up on the answer, what good is it? We might as well not read it at all, or write our own Bible. The study of Scripture is meant to be an exercise of submission and obedience, not to pad ourselves on the back for always being right.

Jesus’ Argument for Radical Monogamy

Now that we see the charge being made at Jesus regarding divorce, we will see how Christ responds by referring to marriage as God intended it and also the intent of the divorce laws given by Moses.

An Argument from Creation

Jesus answers the first question with a quotation from Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 put together. The reference to an earlier part of the law demanded more weight of authority according to the way Jews read it.

The first quotation from Genesis 1 is looking at the first creation of humanity, where God created them male and female. The implication here is that God’s creation of male and female means that they should never be separated. Since they both make up the whole of what it means to be human, they should not sever that bond.d

The second quotation from Genesis 2 is following the creation of the marital covenant. Even though the word marriage is not used, the concept is instituted here and the one flesh union is a union bound together by God and not man. Therefore, what God has joined together in this covenant should not be separated. This means every marriage which can definitively be called a marriage is sanctified by God in a one-flesh union. This is what God has joined together, not man. It is not something humans came up with nor have the right to end.

“One flesh” a reference to family ties. The husband and wife become family, a bond that is always made by God and therefore should not be severed.

The Response to Deuteronomy 24

Here, the pharisees bring up Deuteronomy 24, and exaggerate what they call a command but Jesus rightly refers to as an allowance. We get some insight not only into this command, but many of the commands in the OT Law.

The Law was not perfect, because it was not addressed to perfect people who were able to follow a perfect law. It had exceptions to God’s will simply because of the hardness of the human heart apart from saving faith. Such was the case with laws regarding slavery in the OT, where the law limits the evil, but does not abolish it completely because of the hardness of Israel’s heart. If they couldn’t keep even these laws, how could they have kept a perfect law?

What Jesus draws out here is that the allowance was never part of the original intent, but only an allowance based on the existence of faithlessness in sinful humanity. Jesus obviously takes a more conservative view of the passage, more like Shammai than Hillel, but even more-so. Jesus limits the cause of divorce to be only in cases of sexual immorality, which we will look at more in a moment. He also rules out remarriage after a wrongful divorce. This draws us back to the truth that God creates the one flesh union, and signing a piece of paper does not force God to sever it. This is why wrongful remarriage is adultery, because while you may have divorce papers, God has not severed that union just because you wanted to. This is the ultimate lie behind divorce, the idea that we have the authority over something only God does. Is this not the lie behind assisted suicide? Is it not the lie behind abortion? Is this not the same lie that is behind transgenderism, witchcraft, ordaining women as pastors, passive parenting and many other sins of our time? These are not all on the same level, and yet they have the same source: we want to control what only God has a say in. It is God who binds a man and a woman together. You may have said the vows, but God sealed your flesh to never part. There is no you without them, you are no longer a single person in the world. Just as you do not choose your siblings or parents, you cannot choose to end a partnership sealed by God. What God has joined together, nobody has the right to separate.

The Conclusion and Application

Jesus ends with the one exception, a debated and controversial word pornea, which translates as sexual immorality. This word is not just adultery, it is a broad category that refers to any type of sexual immorality as defined in the OT. Divorce and remarriage on any other basis, Jesus says, is to commit adultery because the one flesh union still holds, no matter what your divorce papers say. While we do not have the time to go over all the different ways pornea has been interpreted, it is clear that Jesus interprets the indecency of Deut 24 as this. As a broad category, this refers not only to what would be considered technically as adultery, although it does include that, but also any sexual contact with someone outside of the marriage union. Homosexuality, bestiality, and sexual acts that fall short of intercourse would apply here as well.

However, we should still see this in light of verse 8. Even this exception only exists because of hardness of heart. Divorce, is any case, is not in God’s moral will. In Jesus day, it was illegal to continue a marriage after adultery had taken place, but with what we just learned of forgiveness at the end of chapter 18 I think we see that Jesus here gives a provision in the case on unrepentant immorality. If we have the attitude that we are just waiting for our spouse to get caught in some depravity to throw them out on the street, I think we miss the point. Again, it is because of hardheartedness that Moses allowed divorce and nowhere in the text does that change.

Now, when someone a married person gives their body to another sexually, even if it is not intercourse, they have broken the one flesh covenant of their marriage. While the Jews of Jesus day believed this ended the marriage covenant, I don’t believe this is necessary since God continued in his covenant with Israel despite sins that added up to spiritual adultery. However, in their hardness of heart, the covenant was broken and a new covenant was needed, which we have in Christ. There are many ways that we fail to live up to our covenant stipulations, both with Christ and with our spouses, but immorality is the equivalent of denying Christ before men. Forgiveness should be possible, but it cannot be overlooked that the one flesh union was violated. When this is done and there is no true, visible repentance for it, divorce may be the only option. This is a sad reality, and only exists because of hardness of heart, but it should not be this way. So in Jesus mind, divorce should be avoided if possible because it is always God’s will that two people bound in one flesh as a new family be separated only by death in God’s timing.

The Disciple’s Response

The disciple’s respond, probably after they were alone with Jesus, by saying that this makes marriage unappealing. It would be better not be married, they think. If I am stuck with this person for life, that sounds very risky and potentially very painful if the marriage becomes unhappy. Should I not avoid marriage entirely?

Jesus’ Response and Teaching on Celibacy

Jesus response to this is very interesting. When he says in verse 11 that not everyone can receive this saying, he is referring to the disciple’s comment in verse 10. However, Jesus is not agreeing with them. Instead, he is turning their comment on its head.

While the disciples think that abstaining from marriage would be easier, Jesus talks about it as the more difficult option. In Jewish thinking, marriage was a necessary part of the covenant at creation to multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. However, Jesus introduces the concept of celabacy for the sake of the Kingdom.

In the OT, eunuchs could not come into the temple, and yet one of the early converts to Christianity is both a gentile and a eunuch (Acts 8:26-40). This may have been a fulfillment of Is 56:3-5

Isaiah 56:3–5 ESV

Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the Lord say, “The Lord will surely separate me from his people”; and let not the eunuch say, “Behold, I am a dry tree.” For thus says the Lord: “To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.

While marriage and children were an important part of Israelite life under the old covenant, Jesus introduces the fulfillment in the idea that the Kingdom of God is spread through evangelism, and one could give up the privileges and joys of family life for this greater task. However, not everyone can receive it. This turns the disciple’s comment on its head. It may be true that it is better not to marry if one is called to celibacy for the Kingdom, but this is not because the purpose of lifelong marriage is too hard, in fact this is harder. One will have to commit themselves in one way or another, either to lifelong sexual abstinence and loneliness without family for the sake of the Gospel, or they must devote themselves to one spouse for life. In other words, you cannot escape the design God has for you to devote your whole life in some way. You life and freedom are not for saving for yourself, they are for spending selflessly for the sake of God’s glory.

Conclusion: Our Response

Grant Osborne concerning Deut 24:1 and the mention of “indecency”:

Matthew Explanation of the Text

divorce is always the result of a series of sins that a couple commits against each other. It is effected by going against God’s will time after time. It is the better of two terrible options—continuing acts of “indecency” against each other, or breaking the marriage vow.

Divorce is never God’s will for your life and can only be the result of sin. This remains true even if divorce is necessary because of a hardhearted and faithless spouse.

Divorce is tricky and messy, and different situations are different. Its not always easy to see the right thing in some situations. However, we must be willing to give ourselves as best we can to God’s ordained will concerning marriage and have a heart devoted to its continuation.

Marriage exists for God’s glory as a living Gospel witness, and we should not consider marriage without this being the first and foremost idea in our minds.

Whatever God has called you to, your life is meant to give away. The Pharisees and most Jews at the time sought to interpret God’s word in a way that freed them to do whatever they desired. In all areas of life, we must seek the will of God that we may submit to it. Your life doesn’t exist for you to hoard it. Marriages give to each other, they give to children, they give to their church. Single Christians give more to Christ through devoted service freed from the responsibilities of marriage. Either way, your life is not your own. You were bought with a price.

Related Media

Related Sermons