“Who Commits Adultery in Divorce?”
Matthew 5:31-32
INTRODUCTION What is the Meaning of Matthew 5.31-32
Matthew 5. Since statistics Canada stopped collecting divorce rate data in 2008, it is a little tricky to figure out the divorce rate in Canada. It is predicted that about 40% of married couples divorce before their 30th anniversary.[1] Québec had the highest rate of divorce in 2003, 49.7%. In Canada, the average duration of marriage for persons who finalized their divorce in 2008 was 13.7 years.[2]
And divorce, as everyone expects, is stressful. The Holmes And Rahe Stress Scale is often used by doctors to rank stressful events. The death of a spouse (or child*) ranks first on that stress scale, receiving a perfect 100. After that is divorce, which gets a 73, followed by marital separation and imprisonment, at 63. [3]
For nonadults or children, the divorce of parents is a 90. For the parents, divorce is a 73. For kids whose parents divorce, it’s a 90. Divorce therefore, is more stressful on the kids than the parents.[4]
In Alberta, there are 3 legally accepted grounds for divorce, according to the Divorce Act: separation for 1 year, adultery (physical intimacy outside of the marriage), or cruelty (violence, continuous verbal abuse, drunkenness, excessive drug use).[5]
But in England all the way back in 1857, according to British politician John Campbell, there were on average three divorces per year. 3 divorces per year, 1857 England. Why is this? Well, adjusting for inflation, someone wanting to get divorce even in the case of adultery would have to raise the equivalent of $82,000 or more to cover divorce costs, then go to the Ecclesiastical court and obtain a decree of separation, then go to the secular courts and obtain a judgment against the spouse’s adulterous partner, then go to Parliament, yes to Parliament and present this information hoping for an Act of Parliament to grant it.
And a similar story could also be told for Canada. In the 34 year period extending from 1867-1901, over 34 years there were only 69 divorces in the whole country, averaging 2 divorces per year.[6]
Alberta was founded after having split from the NW Territories in 1905, but Alberta’s first divorce didn’t occur until nearly 15 years later in 1919.[7] Dear people, this was just 100 years ago! Comparing that to today, there were approximately 3.3 million people over the age of 15 in Alberta in 2012, and also 336,198 divorced persons. Including anyone over the age of 15, over 10% of the people in Alberta are divorced. But of course that doesn’t even give the right picture, since the average age of divorce isn’t 15 or even 30, but 44 for men and 41 for women.
What that tells us is there has been an epidemic of divorce and presumably remarriage in our province since just 100 years ago. But what does Jesus say…
Matthew 5:31–32 31 “It was said, ‘Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce’; 32 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.
Jesus does not approve, in fact he calls it adultery! And perhaps you recall from last time who is guilty of adultery. From verse 28, if you look with lust at a woman you commit adultery and now verse 32, if you divorce your wife except for this word ‘unchastity’ translated “sexual immorality” in the ESV and the NKJ… if you divorce your wife except for unchastity, you make her commit adultery and if you marry a divorced woman, you commit adultery.
Once again, this is meant to be shocking! If you’re angry, you are as guilty as the murderer, destined for the lake of fire! If you look with lust, you commit adultery and deserve the lake of fire, and now if you divorce and remarry under the right circumstances, you commit that same adultery.
GRIEF! CONCERN! HEARTACHE!
Now, my heart breaks for those who have endured the sin and the stress of divorce and remarriage. Just like with those who have uncontrolled sinful anger or who are continually looking on with lust, this is a grievous thing. And you have church leaders, even church leaders who are advocating divorce and they advocate remarriage.
And as I wrestled with this topic again this week … seriously wrestled… I went through a series of emotions: frustration over attempting to understand, excitement of discovery, the relief that comes with knowing the boundaries, the heartache of knowing of those who have sinned in this way, unknowingly…and the thought that perhaps someone listening today will eventually commit this kind of adultery.
If you are divorced or remarried and you sought the divorce or the remarriage and you didn’t even have a clue, I sympathize with you! But this passage is meant to be convicting.
And just like with what we’ve recently studied in this passage…like with anger or lust, if you have committed this sin and you receive Jesus’ teaching on this issue and you turn your back on your sin and ask the Lord to forgive you, you are clean in your heart before God. No sin that can be committed today is beyond forgiveness from God. He died in your place, spilled his blood for every one of your sins: past, present, and future.
So, there is no need, if you have repented of the sin … there is no need for you to feel guilty all over again.
However, for those of you who are not married and can scripturally pursue marriage and if you are presently married, you need to keep this saying in mind, “no divorce, no remarriage.” Are you following Jesus?
I’m learning on this issue
It has been almost exactly 5 years ago now since I last preached on this topic of divorce and remarriage from Mark 10, and I’m still learning about this topic. But I feel more confident today than I did then. This is one of those issues where I feel like I will never be able to be entirely confident about my understanding of the issue. So I request your patience today. You may disagree and as we will see, this is an issue about which good men differ. Also, we might be a little longer than normal today as well.
Ok, let’s get into it. First, what Jesus’ audience heard… from Deut. 24:1-4…we’ll read Jesus words here and then we’ll turn to Deut. 24.
-
What they heard: Divorce requires a certificate (5:31)
Matthew 5:31 31 “It was said, ‘Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce’;
Jesus is quoting from Deut. 24:1-4 and he is addressing their misunderstanding of divorce. Keep a hand here and then turn there quickly…And see if you can find out the command in the passage. What is Moses commanding?
Deuteronomy 24:1–4 1 “When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency [key phrase, “some indecency”] in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house, 2 and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife, 3 and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife, 4 then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, ..
You can see that the command is not that if you find some indecency in her, give her a certificate of divorce. The command is if he does find some indecency in her and he does send her way, if that happens, then her former husband who sent her away cannot take her back again. Moses did not command divorce, but the Law of Moses permitted divorce, as Jesus says in Matthew 19, and it was because their hearts were hard.
So as Jesus teaches this in Matthew 5, there are two main schools of thought among the Pharisees as they tried to understand what it says in Deut 24:1 “some indecency” and whether or not they could divorce their wife. What does “some indecency” refer to? Well, there is the conservative Shammai position that holds that divorce and remarriage was allowed only in cases of adultery. The indecency was a matter of sexual indecency. That’s the conservative Shammai position.
But then there was the more liberal Hillel position, which stated that divorce and remarriage was permissible in any case, it was just whatever he found to be indecent, inappropriate.
So the Hillel position said you could divorce your wife and marry another if she burns your dinner, but the Shammai position held that only adultery allowed for divorce and remarriage. Both positions are among the Pharisees and both positions expect remarriage after divorce.
The phrase “some indecency” literally translates to “nakedness of a thing” or “a matter of nakedness”, clearly referring to sexual misconduct. So, Hillel is out!
But as you noticed in Deuteronomy 24, the question is not, “Can I divorce my wife?” The question is, “if my first husband divorces me could I ever go back to him?” That’s the question and the answer was “no”!
Now, back to Matthew 5. Verse 31 again, Matthew 5:31 31 “It was said, ‘Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce’;
Jesus is telling them what they have heard, “it was said.” Jesus’ audience believed in an actual command to divorce, “Let him give her a certificate!” They believe that, we know, because the Pharisees come to Jesus in Matthew 19:7 and ask, “Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?” Moses didn’t command them to divorce, but due to hardness of heart, it was permitted under OT law.
But once she had a certificate in her hand, she was free to remarry. To give that certificate would protect her financially because in that destitute time period, she would have opportunity to be married again and to be supported by a husband. Moses allowed that because of their hard hearts.
TRANS: Now, what does Jesus teach …
-
What Jesus says (5:32)
Matthew 5:31–32 31 “It was said, ‘Whoever sends his wife away, let him give her a certificate of divorce’; 32 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.
Here it is…
-
Everyone who divorces his wife is responsible for her adultery unless she first committed porneia
Just like the Pharisees did with Deuteronomy 24, many evangelicals do today with Matthew 5:32. This text is not answering the question, “Who may divorce?” The text is answering the question, “Who is guilty of adultery in a divorce?”
Part of the difficulty is the exception clause, let’s just take that out for a moment and see how it reads.
“but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife [skip the next clause]… makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” So, who commits adultery?
1. Everyone who divorces his wife and…
2. whoever marries a divorced person
That’s who is responsible for adultery. Everyone who divorces his wife is responsible for his wife’s adultery because she’ll go off and get remarried to make sure she’s taken care of…if you divorced her in the 1st century, you would be responsible for her adultery…and, last phrase of the verse, whoever marries a divorced person commits adultery because her first husband still lives. But there is an exception to your responsibility in your wife’s adultery if you divorce your wife. There is a case when that’s not true.
Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman causes her to commit adultery, though this wouldn’t be true in what case? In that phrase we left out, in the case of “unchastity”, which is the Greek word porneia. And it’s that word that is crucial to get right in order to properly understand the verse. When is a man not guilty of his wife’s adultery in divorce? Ok, get on your Bible detective hats. Are you ready?
There are 2 views on the meaning of that word “unchastity” or porneia. We’ll call them the adultery view and the fornication view.
1. The adultery view holds that porneia (translated “unchastity” here), was used to refer to sexual immorality generally. And, in this verse, it refers to immorality by a wife with a third party after the wedding. This view says that if a man’s wife has relations with someone other than her husband after they get married, then he is righteous to divorce her and remarry. This is the majority view.
It is reflected in the NIV which says this, “But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress [the NIV translates porneia as “marital unfaithfulness”, which the NASB translates “unchastity”], and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. A popular modern day Bible teacher holds this view…John MacArthur. It is reflected in his study Bible. As well as many other teachers hold this view. It’s the default view today, really.
2. The fornication view holds that porneia was used to refer to immorality committed by an unmarried person (or if by a married woman, she is a prostitute). And in this verse, it refers to immorality by the woman, which she actually committed before the wedding. This view says that if a man’s wife has relations with someone other than her husband before they get married and she hides it from her husband-to-be and it is made apparent later, like on the wedding night, then he is righteous to divorce her (or annul the marriage) and remarry. This is the minority view.
This view is reflected in the KJV which says, “But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery [the KJV translates porneia as fornication, which means immorality committed by unmarried/single person]: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.” English dictionaries that I personally referenced that were published around the time of the publishing of the KJV in 1611 verify that when the KJV translators used the term fornication, they meant “relations committed by a single person.”[8] Voddie Baucham and John Piper, among others, hold this view.
I think the defining question to help us sort this out is this, “Why does Jesus use porneia instead of the Greek word for adultery?”
I mean, if Jesus meant to say what the NIV says, that you can divorce your spouse for marital unfaithfulness, why didn’t Jesus use the Greek term for adultery, moicheo? Because he uses that term for adultery in the verse, look at it again…
Matthew 5:32 32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of porneia, makes her commit adultery (moicheo); and whoever marries a divorced woman commits moicheo.
Why didn’t Jesus just make it clear that what He had in mind was marital unfaithfulness and say moicheo, adultery?
Why didn’t He just say…
Matthew 5:32 32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of adultery (moicheo), makes her commit adultery (moicheo); and whoever marries a divorced woman commits moicheo.
So, why did He use the term porneia or fornication?
And the answer is that there is a difference between adultery (moicheo) and fornication (porneia).
Are you with me? There is a difference between the terms adultery and fornication. We can see that by a number of passages in the NT where there are lists of sins and these sins occur. For example, in
Matthew 15:19 19 “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries (moicheia), fornications (porneia), thefts, false witness, slanders.
If they are side by side, clearly there is a difference between the two.
Mark 7:21 21 “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, [why include them both if they are the same? That would be like saying out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, marital unfaithfulness, and adulteries. What’s the difference between marital unfaithfulness and adultery? Clearly, there is a difference between the two words.]
1 Corinthians 6:9 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators [porneia] … nor adulterers [moicheia], nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, [will inherit the kingdom. ]
Clearly there is a difference between fornication, porneia, and adultery, or moicheia. And the way the KJV translators understood the term was that it referred to relations by someone unmarried, a person who is single. And seeing how the word is used in the Greek translation of the OT, the NT, as well Greek written after the NT was written …they all verify that indeed it does mean fornication.
For example, in John 8:41, the Pharisees say with a wink to Jesus, “We were not born of fornication (porneia), we have one father: God.” The Pharisees indirectly accuse Jesus of being born out of wedlock, by premarital relations. They assume Mary inappropriately conceived Jesus before she was married to Joseph, committing fornication.
1 Co. 7:2, because of the temptation of fornication (of premarital relations), Paul recommends marriage.
1 Corinthians 7:2 2 But because of immoralities [porneia], each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband.
Because of the temptation to commit premarital intimacy, get married. So the word largely has reference to immorality committed by a single person, although there are references to it in Greek Literature where it refers to married women who literally prostitute themselves.
What is the teaching of the verse then?
Matthew 5:32 32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of premarital intimacy, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
This teaches that everyone who divorces his wife makes her commit adultery …why? Because it is assumed that she’ll remarry. And then if the man then goes ahead and marries a divorced woman, he commits adultery himself. And that’s because their first spouses still live.
The exception to this is the Jewish practice that is behind that phrase “except for fornication.” There is a real exception to this. If a man discovers on the wedding night that his bride has had relations with another man before they got married, he may choose to annul the marriage. Unlike the adultery view, the fornication view actually has an OT reference to this and it’s found in Deut. 22, if you can turn there quickly, Deut. 22.
Deut 22:13-19 deals with a case where a man falsely accuses his new wife, his bride, of having already had relations before she was married. If the proper evidence can be presented for her innocence, she is cleared, and the husband is fined 100 shekels of silver and it’s given to the father and he can never divorce her.
But in vv. 21-22, if it is true that she did have relations before the wedding night with someone else and he can prove that, then she shall be stoned to death. Clearly, this is a case where the woman concealed or hid from her husband her intimacy before marriage. Because if she admitted it, they wouldn’t be in this mess.
Verse 21 says that she has “played the harlot”, she as it says in the Greek translation there, she “ekporneo” she committed fornication, she had relations before marriage. So you can see, that the fornication view as held by 60 different published translations of Matthew 5:32[9], has as support an actual OT reference.
So now, back to Matthew 5:32, when Jesus says…
Matthew 5:32 32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of fornication [in this case, concealed premarital intimacy], makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Now we have OT precedent for this. Jesus isn’t saying stone her, but that the husband may divorce her if he discovers she has hidden premarital intimacy from him.
-
Whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery
Now, where this leads to is this: no divorce except for hidden premarital intimacy and no remarriage. Jesus says, “whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” And that’s true because her first spouse still lives. Now, let’s pull out our half sheet.
Now, let’s put these clear passages together, in that last column.
-
Divorce + remarriage = adultery (x2)
-
Marriage to divorced woman=adultery
-
No divorce, no remarriage, only reconcile.
-
No remarriage to a different spouse until death.
Clearly, no pursuing divorce, no remarriage while your spouse lives. The clear passages only teach no divorce, no remarriage. Now, how do we interpret the unclear passages? Proper Bible interpretation is that you understand unclear passages in light of the clear passages. You let the clear passages teach you first and then you seek to understand unclear passages in light of them.
But of course, we have those seemingly unclear exception clauses in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9!
Now, here’s a 2nd defining question. Remember our first defining question… “Why does Jesus use porneia instead of the Greek word for adultery?” And we saw that there is a difference between those two words, so Jesus isn’t talking about adultery when he speaks about unchastity. And we saw how porneia refers to immorality committed by what kind of person … ? By someone who is unmarried. But this second question is…”Why does Matthew have the “except for fornication” phrase and Mark and Luke do not?” “Why does Matthew have the “except for fornication” phrase and Mark and Luke do not?”
And the answer is because, as is universally understood, Matthew’s audience is Jewish and Mark and Luke’s audience is Gentile. So what?
Well, are there differences between Jew and Gentile marriage laws that could cause confusion? Yes. The Jews have laws governing premarital relations; the Gentiles at that time in that part of the world do not. Therefore, so as to be clear to Gentiles and retain the intent of Jesus’ statement, Mark and Luke leave out the phrase “except for fornication” knowing they do not have laws regarding premarital relations as do the Jews in Deuteronomy 22. They leave it out so that they don’t confuse the Gentiles you might understand the exception clause to be referring to something else.
But Matthew retains that phrase for his Jewish audience so that the Jews understand that the “except for fornication” law is retained, not in its full form demanding stoning, but as a principal, allowing for divorce.
In other words, to be clear, since the Jews would have understood their own laws against pre-marital relations, Matthew retained the “except for fornication” line to help the Jews understand that Jesus allows for the annulment of the marriage when on the wedding night it is discovered that she is not a virgin.
And to be clear to Gentiles, who do not have laws against premarital relations, Mark and Luke leave out the exception clause in order to help Gentiles understand that Jesus does not allow for a full divorce or remarriage, which He doesn’t.
ILL: This is demonstrated in the birth of Jesus himself. You remember that Jesus’ mother Mary was betrothed, which was a more legal form of engagement, technically a marriage without allowing for physical intimacy… She was betrothed to Joseph. And before they came together, she was pregnant with Jesus. And Joseph clearly discovered it. Her abdomen is swelling nicely!
And he rightly considered the plan to divorce her. Because betrothal is marriage apart from the physical consummation of the marriage, he could righteously divorce her. At that time under Roman law, the Mosaic law of Deuteronomy 22 that governed pre-marital relations was not observed. So, Joseph himself is an example of how this would have looked had Mary truly been unfaithful to him. A woman is unfaithful before the marriage ceremony and the man discovers it during the betrothal period or on the wedding night. Jesus allows for a divorce or annulment in such cases.
But apart from a case like Joseph’s, no divorce, no remarriage.
2. Somebody says, why is it so strict? It’s sounds so shocking! Yes! The disciples themselves were shocked
Matthew 19:9–10 9 Jesus says, “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for fornication [premarital relations], and marries another woman commits adultery.” 10 The disciples said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.”
You see then, Jesus teaching on divorce and remarriage is shocking, “I mean, it’s better not to marry!” But it wouldn’t be that shocking if Jesus simply took the conservative Shammai position that holds that divorce and remarriage was allowed only in cases of adultery. The disciples knew of that position and if Jesus held that position, Jesus’ teaching would not have shocked them. It needs to shock because the original hearers were shocked! “What? It’s better not to marry than to not have a way out!”
Why must it be so shocking like this? Because Mark 10:9 9 “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” The eternal God was the one who joined the two people together.
CONCLUSION What is the Meaning of Matthew 5.31-32
Now, in our loose, immoral day and age, this kind of the teaching is emotionally difficult to apply in certain cases. And you may be thinking of cases of mental or physical abuse, or perpetual adultery, or some sort of gross sin, but whatever your case may be, but we can’t modify Jesus’ teaching to fit a difficult marriage situation. No divorce, no remarriage.
And this is where the church comes to support. In the nation of Israel, as a nation would be, it would be difficult to find the support that you need. Like in our nation. But in the church, it’s different. Whatever marriage situation that you or anyone that you or any of us deal with, we support each other. We protect them from assault, we protect the children from harm, we come along side, we rescue, we feed, we pray, we encourage, we open up our homes, we love, we provide. This is the church!
And also as I bring this to a close, we must understand that we do not treat divorced and remarried people as second class citizens in Christ’s kingdom. Why would you choose this sin and treat them as second class and not treat those who are angry and those who look with lust as second class citizens? All sin is serious sin.
And I’ll remind you again, there is not a sin that is beyond forgiveness. Every sin that can be committed today can be forgiven today upon repentance and confession, asking Christ to forgive you. And I know that, for some of us here this morning, even discussing this topic brings back horrible memories. And for that, I’m terribly sorry!
But Christ is the gracious and compassionate one who has spilled his blood for your sin, all of your sin, not a one of your sin isn’t cleansed if you are trusting solely in Him. And He is the great healer of souls…there is a balm in Gilead to heal the sin-sick soul…Jesus is the one who sent to us the Comforter, the Holy Spirit…
Isaiah 53:5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our peace fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed.
Isaiah 57:18–19 18 “I have seen his ways, but I will heal him; I will lead him and restore comfort to him and to his mourners, 19 Creating the praise of the lips. Peace, peace to him who is far and to him who is near,” Says the Lord, “and I will heal him.”
And in the end of days, Revelation 22:2 in the middle of the street of the eternal city, on either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
There is healing with the LORD; the great God with whom we have to do, marvellous in grace and compassion.
But to those of you who are single and are allowed to remarry, you know this truth, you are held accountable to it. Who knows when we’ll address this topic again. If you are a member of this church and you seek a divorce or remarriage, we will love you and love you and love you and exhort you and love you, and if you do divorce or remarry we will continue to love you, but there will be consequences.
We must follow Jesus, no matter the cost. And this is one reason why the church is here: to provide help for you in your marriage. I’d be the first to admit, I don’t have all the answers, but what has been presented here, is generally clear, and I believe, convincing. There does seem to be so much debate on this issue, in part I think, because people that go to churches aren’t willing to submit to Jesus’ clear teaching in the clear passages; rather, they let what seems to them to be the unclear passages interpret the clear passages, which isn’t good practice.
731 O Give Us Homes
-
https://www.galbraithfamilylaw.com/blog/divorce-rate-in-canada/ ↑
-
http://www.butterfieldlaw.ca/divorce-statistics-in-canada-a-snapshot/ ↑
-
https://paindoctor.com/top-10-stressful-life-events-holmes-rahe-stress-scale/ ↑
-
https://paindoctor.com/top-10-stressful-life-events-holmes-rahe-stress-scale/ ↑
-
https://www.alberta.ca/get-a-divorce.aspx ↑
-
Jennings Daniel. Except for Fornication, pg. 73 ↑
-
http://www.provincialarchives.alberta.ca/how-to/explore-learning-and-education/discovering-albertas-court-records/interesting-cases/divorce-clark.html ↑
-
For example, https://ia802605.us.archive.org/33/items/englishexposito00bullgoog/englishexposito00bullgoog.pdf See page 116. Also, A Table Alphabeticall by Robert Cawdrey. ↑
-
Jennings, 27 http://www.danielrjennings.org/except_for_fornication_version_1.pdf ↑