NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER NINETEEN

Part III

Verses 8-9: Jesus answered, “Moses allowed you to divorce your wives because you refused to accept God’s teaching. But divorce was not allowed in the beginning. I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for infidelity, and marries another woman is guilty of adultery.”

We read in one of the earliest collections of Rabbinical teaching, that while the subject of divorce was being discussed by several Rabbis, one Rabbi said: “We have learned that the Gentiles are not subject to the laws of consecrating a woman as betrothed through a dowry. What about their being subject to the laws of divorce? The law is this: either they are not subject to the law of divorce at all, or unlike Israelite practice each issues a write of divorce to the other.” One Rabbi goes on to say: “I hate divorce, says the Lord, the God of Israel.’¹ Among Israelites I have framed the law of divorce, and I have not given the law of divorce to the non-Jewish people of the world.’”²

In other words, the Jews felt that their form of marriage and divorce was unique to them, and God did not institute the same commandments on the rest of the world’s population. We know from history, that in ancient Rome couples could marry based simply upon mutual consent. If they decided to separate, then the husband had to return the entire dowry to the wife’s family. It was not until Caesar Augustus came to power (27 BC to 14 AD) that formal divorce was instituted. Among the ancient Greeks, divorce was by mutual consent and either divorcee could remarry with little consequences.

Chrysostom adds this thought to the subject: “With unspeakable wisdom Jesus makes a defense even for these things, saying that ‘Moses for the hardness of your hearts’ had therefore made that law. And he does not let Moses remain accused, since it was He Himself who had given Moses the law, but He frees him from blame and turns the whole matter onto their heads, as He does everywhere. Just as when they accused the disciples while they were gleaning grain, He showed the accusers themselves to be at fault. When they charged them with eating with unwashed hands, Jesus proved that they themselves were the transgressors; and the same happened over the Sabbath. So it happened here too.”³

So the bottom line is that divorce is not to be sought first, but reconciliation. If that cannot be attained because of serious differences, then separation can be tried until reconciliation is accomplished. When that proves unachievable, then live apart but try to keep from ending the marriage since this will only appear to be a license to get married again. However, if the cause for the divorce is unfaithfulness on the part of one partner, then the divorce will permanently end the relationship as though the other person had died, and then remarriage is permissible. But no where did our Lord declare that divorce is an unpardonable sin, for if He could forgive the woman brought to Him after having been caught in the very act of adultery, then divorce can be forgiven as well. But it should be avoided if at all possible.

Since Christianity’s roots are clearly tied to Judaism, it is clear that this is where the teachings of divorce emanated, and why Jesus addressed them here. It is also important to note that Jesus was not talking to non-Jews but to the Jews who came with the question. So He answered it within the context of Jewish teaching and the Law. And after hearing what our Lord had to say, it appeared to the disciples that divorce was such a constant threat to any marriage, and that it could also serve as a reason for those who divorced to be charged with adultery if the reason for the divorce is not infidelity in the first place. So they drew a logical conclusion, that marriage wasn’t worth all the trouble.

Verse 10: The followers then said to Jesus, “If that is the only reason a man can divorce his wife, it is better not to marry.”

Now the disciples are overreacting. If there were two competing thoughts on divorce and remarriage, why get married at all. Adultery was punishable by stoning to death, so why risk it. But our Lord lets them know that staying single is a choice, and it is one that should only be taken if one is committed to living a single life. Otherwise, marriage is ordained of God and should be entered into joyfully. After all, didn’t God say: “I see that it is not good for the man to be alone. I will make the companion he needs, one just right for him”.⁴ One Jewish translator suggests that this read: “It is not good for the human to be alone. I shall make him a sustainer beside him.”⁵ And doesn’t Solomon say, “If you find a wife, you have found something good. Having her shows that the Lord is happy with you.”⁶

This has proven to be one of the most controversial and misapplied teachings of our Lord found anywhere in scripture. Christ’s stand on marriage and divorce were not that controversial even in His day for those who followed God’s covenant; what caused the uproar was for those who abused and misused marriage and divorce laws. Just the same, man’s relationship with God and with their fellow man took on a new meaning with the institution of the New Covenant. Just compare some of His other teachings on hating your brother; hating your enemy; going the second mile, etc. God’s involvement in who becomes our brother or our enemy or the one we go the second mile with, can cover a multitude of people, but when it came to marriage and divorce, the specifics are laid out very plain and simple.

Yet the interpretation by man of these particulars over the centuries have led to much confusion and disagreement, which Jesus clearly anticipated.⁷ What is not so clear to many who read this section is the underlying message that all of these things are dependent on man’s choices, not God’s choices. Jesus is trying to make it clear that we all have choices and not all of them will be good, so we bear the responsibility of coping with our choice or making restitution when the best choices are not made. Over time, the church’s involvement in marriage has added another layer of dos and do nots, and these have been accepted under the premise of whatever is permitted or forbidden on earth will be the same in heaven.

Some scholars feel that Christ’s emphasis on the male-female joining together in wedlock and becoming a unity of one is clearly a reference to what constitutes marriage, and that model should never be changed by man. It should not be understood, however, as indicating that once you chose a spouse; no matter how you made that choice or under what conditions; whether it was done out of necessity, out of lust, out of greed, or out of pure stupidity, that once you are pronounced husband and wife God puts an iron band around you and your spouse like the bands you put on each others’ fingers, and the restriction God places there to join you together should never be broken by man. Jesus makes it clear that the bands of marriage had been broken as far back as Moses day to which he authorized papers of divorce.

What our Lord did emphasize, however, is that God will not be fooled when unacceptable excuses are offered as to why you decided to break the bond of marriage. We could say that the emphasis here is not so much on the sanctity of the ceremony, but God’s way of offering legal protection and provision for the one left stranded and in need. Back in Bible days, it was most often the divorced wife and her children that were in need. So why should one’s promise to repay the loan on a car or house be enforced any more stringent than one’s promise to love, cherish, and protect the one who left everything to become their spouse? Some would attempt to link this explanation with unfaithfulness,⁸ thereby rendering the possibility that the option is open to those who cannot fully accept His ruling on divorce and marriage. But Christ’s words here are in answer to the question of whether anyone should even get married.⁹

Verses 11-12a: He answered, “What you say may apply to some, but everyone—it only applies to those to whom celibacy had been given as a gift. There are different reasons why some men don’t marry. Some were born sterile without the ability to produce children. Others were made that way later in life.”

We must understand the disciple’s inquiry better than what the English version gives us. Let’s reiterate: Jesus had just said that if a man divorces his wife for any other reason than that she was unfaithful and committed adultery, and goes and marries another woman to replace her, he then will be guilty of adultery. So the disciples were extrapolating on that by inquiring if it made any sense to get married in the first place, if their relationship ends up souring and the only way out is for her to commit adultery so the man can be free to remarry. In response Jesus now focuses on the possibility of a man remaining unmarried because he does not want to risk divorce when the marriage breaks down and both are miserable in their relationship. In other words, Jesus concentrates on the question of a man remaining single instead of taking the chance and seeking a wife, hoping she’ll be the right one.

The English gives us an interesting word here to describe such men by identifying them as “eunuchs.” In those days, and many days to follow, when a king wanted to appoint men to take care of their harem they would have them castrated to keep them from being tempted or enticed into intimacy with the king’s wives and concubines; and if they did, no children would result. But the word “eunuch” was also used to identify a man who decided to remain celibate, or one who chooses not to marry for whatever reasons. In Christ’s explanation, He clearly includes both groups: those who chose to remain single, and those who were surgically forced to stay single because in Jewish tradition having children as a married man was a must. Even though our Lord remained single, He did not say that this was the right choice for everyone. It was up to the individual to decide.

As far as we know the apostle Paul remained single; either because he never was married, or he lost his wife to death or separation, and that may have been his thorn in the flesh; that he wanted to get married but knew it would curtail his missionary efforts. Besides, it was also clear that Paul had little income and therefore could not afford to get married. In any case, the commandments of Christ are not to be flaunted. Remaining holy and pure as a vessel of the Spirit is worth the price. Some would plead that those who divorce for reasons of incompatibility, spousal abuse, or being left unattended with the spouse going off never to be heard from again, and remarry before they find Christ as their Savior are exempt from any charges of adultery since the blood of Jesus covers all pasts sins. Their plea is very reasonable and should not be dismissed out of hand; it does have validity.