Thank you to my friends for your support and encouragement!
7 minutes to read. Eternal impact.
In the Gospel of Mark, some Pharisees approach Jesus and ask, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” (Mark 10:2). Summarizing His answer, Jesus states,
“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” (Mark 10:11–12).
This appears to be an absolute statement denying any legitimacy for divorce and remarriage of any kind. The Gospel of Matthew clarifies the question asked, which differs from Mark’s version. Matthew’s Gospel provides a fuller version of the question, thereby placing Jesus’ answer in its proper context. According to Matthew, the Pharisees tested Jesus by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason?” (Matthew 19:3–9). In other words, Mark’s account seems to present the question as a general inquiry about divorce, while Matthew’s version stresses that the Pharisees were specifically asking about the legitimacy of divorcing a wife for “any reason”—a practice that had become increasingly popular among some Pharisees. This distinction is crucial for understanding Jesus’ response and the context of the debate.
Due to the sinfulness of humanity, the Law of Moses justifiably made concessions for divorce in extreme circumstances, when life together for an Israelite couple would become unbearable. Divorce was not approved or commanded but permitted.
The background of the question asked
The collection of the Holy Hebrew scriptures we today call the Old Testament was the Bible Jesus read. The collection of later writings we today call the New Testament was never meant as an alternative to the Old Testament (Mat 5:17-18). This is very important. The entire Bible is the Word of the Living God. Therefore, to understand Jesus, we must start from his Bible. The key biblical text concerning divorce is found in Deuteronomy 24. (Those interested in a far more detailed analysis, please consult David Instone-Brewer’s work “
Understanding this text and the Rabbinic debates about its interpretation—debates current in Jesus’ time—is of utmost importance if we hope to understand Jesus’ words in response to the question.
There we read:
“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 (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר, ervat davar) in her, that he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her away from his house, and she leaves his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife.” (Deut 24:1-4)
Rabbinic materials reveal two main Pharisaic approaches to divorce, attributed to Shammai and Hillel. The debate is documented in the Mishnah (m. Gittin 9:10). Both lived some time before Jesus. Shammai insisted that ervat davar (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר) referred only to sexual immorality. Hillel taught that ervat davar (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר) in Deuteronomy 24:1 could mean anything displeasing to the husband. The Hebrew phrase ervat davar (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר) is very difficult to make sense of. Literally, it may mean something like “nakedness of a thing.” Some translations emphasize the sexual aspect, rendering it as “sexual immorality” or “sexual uncleanness.” For example, the Gospel of Matthew refers to ervat davar (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר) as Greek “πορνείᾳ, porneia.” Others take a broader view, translating it as “something indecent” or “something unseemly,” suggesting it could refer to any behavior or circumstance that the husband finds unacceptable, not necessarily sexual. For example, in the pre-Christian Jewish Septuagint translation (LXX), ἄσχημον πρᾶγμα (aschēmon pragma, “unseemly/indecent matter”) is used. This translation becomes the basis for the “any reason” divorce that Jesus will staunchly oppose.
Jesus’ response to the question asked
To grasp Jesus’ sharp words, we must see the Pharisees’ question in its original context. Essentially, some pharisees asked him, “Which school of Pharisaic thought on divorce do you endorse—Shammai’s ‘strict immorality’ standard or Hillel’s ‘any reason’ divorce?”
Jesus’ response first states that those Pharisees that interpreted ervat davar (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר) in Deuteronomy 24:1 in such a loose way have forsaken the sacred Torah teaching about the creation of Adam and Eve:
“…For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no person is to separate.” (Matt 19:5-6)
The Pharisees that were asking their question challenged Jesus back:
“Why, then, did Moses command to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?” (Matt 19:7)
Jesus continued his argument and defense of the Pharisaic school of Shammai over against Hillel’s:
“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 sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” (Matt 19:8-9)
Jesus first evokes the sinful condition of humanity as the only reason Moses’ law permits divorce at all but endorses Shammai’s conservative view: ervat davar (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר) can only mean “sexual immorality”—it cannot possibly refer to anything that the husband does not like about his wife in general. The key takeaway here is that Jesus did not condemn all divorce and remarriage but specifically the divorce and remarriage propagated by some Pharisees during his time. Jesus made a clear and simple statement: anyone who has not obtained a divorce on biblical grounds remains married. Therefore, if such a person “remarries,” they are clearly guilty of adultery.
Other biblical grounds for divorce
In Exodus, we read about a law that God enjoins upon a husband who marries a slave woman. This law helps us understand God’s heart on the matter, and it has to do with neglect and abuse in marriage. We read:
“If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights. But if he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go free for nothing…” (Ex 21:10-11)
The three provisions of food, clothing, and conjugal rights in Exodus 21:10-11 form the foundational obligations a husband owes to his wife. These reflect God’s concern for justice and dignity within marriage. They reveal a broader principle: marriage is a covenant of mutual care and respect, where each spouse is entitled to basic needs and intimacy.
This principle underscores that marriage is not merely a legal contract but a relationship rooted in love, provision, and mutual honor. These duties apply to both husbands and wives.
The law lets a wife leave without punishment if her husband doesn’t do his duties, and the same goes for the husband. This affirms her right to freedom and protection. Thus, Exodus 21 demonstrates that neglect, specifically the failure to meet these basic marital obligations, constitutes a legitimate reason for divorce, even beyond the explicit grounds in Deuteronomy 24.
Furthermore, physical abuse is generally regarded as a violation of marital obligations and a justification for divorce that safeguards the vulnerable. This understanding refers not to isolated incidents but to ongoing, systematic abuse or neglect, especially when all efforts to restore the marital covenant have been ignored for a prolonged period. The rules in Exodus serve as the basis for marriage duties. They show that God’s law recognizes several valid reasons for divorce.
This principle is also in 1 Corinthians, which prioritizes justice and the oppressed’s welfare. The Apostle Paul, deeply familiar with Mosaic law as a trained Pharisee under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3) and aware of pre-Jesus rabbinic debates, addressed early Gentile Christian believers in Corinth. These believers were considering leaving their pagan spouses. Paul instructs believers to remain married if the pagan spouses consent to live together peacefully. Worshiping a different God is not biblical grounds for divorce. However, if the unbeliever (pagan) leaves, the believer “is not bound” (οὐ δεδούλωται, ou dedoulōtai), literally not enslaved. In this case, the believer is free to remarry (1 Cor 7:10–15). This “Pauline privilege” echoes Exodus 21’s release from neglect, treating willful abandonment as a dissolution of the covenant. Paul’s statement that a valid marriage lasts until death is also applicable: “A wife is bound as long as her husband lives…” (Rom 7:2; 1 Cor 7:39). The apostle presupposes that no biblical grounds for divorce exist in the scenarios he addresses.
In other words, Apostle Paul and Jesus Christ are in complete sync on this important matter. Divorce is permitted only for grave breaches like sexual immorality or abandonment (abuse or neglect), not preference.
Does God hate divorce?
The often repeated claim that “God hates divorce” rests upon an inadequate translation of Malachi 2:16. The Hebrew reads:
כִּי-שָׂנֵא שַׁלַּח, אָמַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְכִסָּה חָמָס עַל-לְבוּשׁוֹ, אָמַר יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת:
Literally the Hebrew states something like:
For he hates, he sends, says LORD, Israel’s God. And he covers with violence his clothes, says LORD of armies.
Some translations, such as NASB in this case, do not stick to the original Hebrew; they switch from the third person to the first, presumably to improve readability.
“For I hate divorce,” says the Lord, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with violence,” says the Lord of armies. (NASB)
However, some translations, such as NIV, in this case, adhere closely to the original Hebrew:
“The man who hates and divorces his wife,” says the Lord, the God of Israel, “does violence to the one he should protect,” says the Lord Almighty. (NIV)
Context reinforces an NIV-style translation. Malachi condemns treacherous divorce by Israelite men who abandoned covenant wives for foreign women (Mal. 2:14–15), violating the marriage covenant that God Himself witnesses. The sin is not divorce per se, but unjustified divorce—violent abandonment that, in this case, harms an undeserving, vulnerable woman.
But that is not all.
The Biblical Hebrew verb soneh (שֹׂנֵא), typically translated “hate,” implies lesser love rather than absolute loathing. Biblical precedents clarify this: God “loved” Jacob and “hated” Esau (Mal. 1:2–3; Rom. 9:13), meaning He chose one over the other, not that He despised Esau (God’s treatment of Esau shows that He loved Esau too). Similarly, Jesus’ call to “hate” one’s parents (Luke 14:26) demands prioritizing Him above family, not real emotional hatred toward parents. In Malachi, soneh (שֹׂנֵא) refers to a husband who prefers a younger foreign woman to his probably older Israelite wife by callously divorcing her. In the Hebrew text, it is the husband, not God, who does the hating.
In short, “God hates divorce” oversimplifies a nuanced text. He hates the violence that breaks covenants, not the lawful dissolution of marriage. He established regulations to protect the oppressed.
Conclusion
In the sacred tapestry of marriage, woven by God’s own hand from the dawn of creation in Genesis, we observe both an unbreakable covenant and compassionate grace amid human frailty. Jesus’ words in Mark 10:11–12 appear absolute at first glance, yet Matthew 19 unveils the true target: the Pharisees’ “any reason” divorce championed by Hillel’s school. Affirming Shammai’s stricter view, Jesus rejects Hillelian divorces that have risen in popularity. Exodus 21:10–11, though not addressed by Jesus since the question concerned only Deuteronomy 24:1, echoes the heart of the Torah by granting freedom from systematic neglect, abuse, or denial of food, clothing, and conjugal rights—covenantal breaches that destroy the vulnerable. Paul harmonizes this in 1 Corinthians 7:15, releasing the believer from bondage when an unbeliever abandons the marriage.
Yet even when divorce occurs outside these bounds—when hardness of heart leads to unjustified separation, when ervat davar is misapplied or ignored—God’s grace remains astonishingly wide. The cross of Christ does not grade sins by severity; it covers them all. The same blood that forgives idolatry, murder, or greed forgives the sin of an unbiblical divorce. Peter’s denial, David’s adultery and murder, Paul’s horrific persecution of early Jesus followers—none were beyond redemption. Neither is this. Repentance turns the heart back to God, and His forgiveness is complete, restoring the sinner to fellowship with Him and His people.
Beloved, if betrayal, cruelty, desertion, or unrepentant neglect have shattered your marriage on biblical grounds, hear this good news clearly: God understands your pain. Full stop. He prioritizes your dignity and safety above a toxic bond that has gone irreparably wrong. Remarriage, on these biblical grounds and after exhaustive efforts at restoration, is not adultery but a doorway to healing, wholeness, and new covenant love under God’s blessing.
And if the divorce itself was the sin—initiated without scriptural warrant—lift your eyes to the same Savior. His grace is not exhausted by our failures; it is magnified in them. Confess, receive mercy, and walk forward in the freedom of the forgiven. Rise with hope—your Creator redeems broken stories, inviting you into joy and a future brimming with His faithful provision. Seek wise counsel, pursue reconciliation where possible, but know that freedom in Christ includes liberation from oppression for God’s children and the boundless forgiveness that makes all things new.
Thank you for this thoughtful piece. For clarification, are you saying that if one spouse refuses conjugal rights, the other spouse is free to leave, as the marital relationship has broken down?
I know Christians who will not take anything from the Tenach that Yeshua has not explicitly spoken on. This seems to be one of those cases.
Alison, yes. THat’s correct (but I added important clarification in the article). We are not talking about from time to time not feeling good kind of thing, we are talking about systematic, ongoing withholding of sex from the spouse over prolonged periods of time. In other words, something permanent, not something temporary and fixable.
Therefore, what God has joined together, no person is to separate.” (Matt 19:5-6. It is logical to glean from the text that one can separate via divorce in violation of this injunction.
I contest that one cannot be divorced and be still married at the same time whether the divorce is legit or not. Divorced having the “get” and still married in the eyes of God makes no sense. I have much to say on this subject.
David, kindly reread the article at least twice more. Then please come back and make your comment again, my brother.
Thank you so much for your explanation. I got this understanding when I was seeking God’s help in my situation – I am divorced and my exhusband was very abusive and had more affairs, I just wanted to say Thank you! God bless you
May the Lord richly bless you, Hana! Friends, if any of you would like to help me to take this teaching to many more people please offer your help here – https://shorturl.at/NpBF7
For the first time in my ministry, I have gotten a much deeper reading and understanding of the subject of divorce. God bless you for being a blessing to.me and I believe to many many others. Great is the Lord our God.
May the Lord bless, keep, and guide you in your ministry!
Excelent study. While I inatley understood the principals and whole heartedly agree I did not have the depth of scriptual documentation. Thank you brother.
You are welcome, Steven. Thanks be to God!
Dear Dr Eli
I thank you again for this piece of writing on divorce and remarriage. It’s interesting that the concept of remarriage is not found in either Jesus’s or Paul’s words. It’s also interesting that word used in Jesus’s words for divorce is “apoluo” and Paul used different word for divorce which is “aphiemi”. When writing about the unbelieving spouse who doesn’t want to be in the marital union anymore Paul uses the word “chorizo” which denotes separation and not necessarily divorce. And in Romans 7:1-2 Paul say according to the law a woman is bound to her husband’s as long as he he lives, and if he dies then she’s free form the law that bound her to that union.
Please clarify these for me Sir.
Shalom, Tembani! Paul likens release from the Law to a wife freed by her husband’s death (Rom 7:1–2). Marriage binds until death; remarriage while the REAL spouse lives = adultery. Jesus rejects Hillel’s “any-reason” divorce, upholding Shammai: only porneia (sexual immorality, Deut 24:1) permits divorce (Matt 19:9). God’s ideal is “one flesh” permanence (Gen 2:24). Yet Torah allows more: Exodus 21:10–11 frees a wife denied food, clothing, or conjugal rights—grounds for abuse/neglect. Paul applies this in 1 Cor 7:15: if an unbeliever leaves, the believer is “not under bondage”—the bond is dissolved; remarriage is allowed.
Rom 7 assumes an intact marriage covenant. Biblical grounds (porneia, abuse, desertion) end it covenantally. Remarriage, then, is not sin but grace-filled restoration. God protects the vulnerable while honoring marriage.
just wondering how we have gone from Jesus’ crystal clear statement in the introduction to its complete relativization and contradiction in the conclusion… no wonder that we today are shammaiians declaratively, but hillelians in practice
Jo, hi. Please read the article thoroughly. First you need to understand Jesus’ statement within ITS context, then you will see that my conclusion suggests nothing but adherence to God’s Law and Jesus’ words in their original context. If you disagree with my argument, I invite you to argue your case. Let’s consider it.
I am a retired pastor after 45 years of ministry. Divorce is one of the thorniest issues I ever had to deal with. Re: the validity of divorce, one statement I picked up over the years that was of eminent help to me is simply that a certificate of divorce is a legal document to indicate that the marriage is duly ended. The individual has not simply walked away from the marriage. He/she has a legal document to indicate that the marriage is OVER. The very existence of a document of divorce provides the legal declaration that the person is un-married and free to remarry. In this way, God was graciously allowing the wronged partner the freedom to remarry within His permissive will.
Indeed. Thank you, Pastor Mark. Friends, if any of you would like to help me to take this teaching to many more people please offer your help here – https://shorturl.at/NpBF7
Excellent post!! I wish I had information like this when I started ministry.
Thank you, Pastor Mark, this means a lot!
I’ve found that those who are most judgmental concerning remarriage after divorce are often in poor marriages themselves, wherein they act like shrews toward their spouse. They’re the kind who berate their spouse in public and functionally wear the pants. They can’t fathom that someone would actually have a limit to such abuse because their spouse has been a doormat for years.
Now that you bring this up… 🙂
Great article. I dont find faults with it.
Please also note Numbers 5: 11-39 the adultery test.
Also think of Hosea who married a prostitute who had children by other men yet God told him to fetch her and stay married.
Also these questions are assuming the wife is guilty. What happens if its a husband straying or beating a wife? Does she have legal right to divorce? Not much is discussed about women’s obligations
Sharon, hi. THanks. Hosea’s decision to marry a prostitute, or to remain married to her, served as a prophetic sign and should not be considered normative behavior. What point were you trying to make by quoting the Adultery test? Who is entitled to divorce? Can a wife have that right I think Ex 21 that I referred to in the article makes exactly this case. In practice it is quite difficult in Israel or Judaism to get divorced unless unfaithfulness is involved. Rabbis generally encourage a prolonged period of SHOLOM BAIT (trying to work it out at home). Ultimately its the rabbanut (jewish religious authorities) that grant permission to divorce or withhold it.
jo wrote: “shammaiians declaratively, but hillelians in practice”
Sadly, this is also the case in many contexts other than divorce 🙁
We also see in John 8 that Pharisees bring a woman caught in adultery, but not the man as both should be sentenced together. Jesus did not fall for their trap.
He showed mercy and compassion.
People need to learn from this
The text is not part of ANY early manuscripts (if I am not mistaken it appears in John’s Gospel first in 4-5th century).
Whaaaat!!! @Dr Eli, Are you serious? Does it mean that people smuggled things into the word of God? Meaning that the Holy Spirit did not breath those texts through the beloved apostle John. Please clarify this.
There is no question that LATER scribes added things here and there. Please pick up a study on this topic, as it is quite extensive.
In 1 Corinthians 7, Pau use two words “χωρισθῆναι” in verse 10 and “χωρισθῇ”and “ἀφιέναι” in verse 11 which seem to denote separation but in verse 12 &13 he uses “ἀφιέτω” for the husband and his unbelieving wife who still want to be in the union visa versa. And in verse 15 he used “χωρίζεται” and “χωριζέσθω” when an unbelievabing spouse is tired of the union.
Please explain for the purpose for Paul to use these different Greek work if he meant the same thing ” divorce” why is he not just using a single whether chorizo or aphiemi?
Paul deliberately varies his vocabulary in 1 Cor 7 to distinguish degrees of marital rupture, not to equate them with “divorce” (for which NT Greek prefers ἀπολύω, cf. Mt 19:9).
χωρισθῆναι / χωρισθῇ / χωρίζεται / χωριζέσθω (from χωρίζω) mean literal “separation” or “departure” without dissolving the bond. In vv. 10–11 it forbids believers initiating separation; if it occurs, reconciliation or celibacy is required. In v. 15 the unbeliever’s departure (χωρίζεται) frees the believer—still separation, not remarriage license.
ἀφιέναι / ἀφιέτω (from ἀφίημι) carry a stronger “release/let go” nuance. In v. 11 it describes the wife’s self-separation; in vv. 12–13 the believing spouse must not “release” a consenting unbeliever.
Paul avoids monotony to signal: (1) believers may not initiate even separation (χωρίζω), (2) must not actively dismiss a willing partner (ἀφίημι), (3) are not enslaved if abandoned (passive χωρίζεται). Distinct verbs preserve nuanced pastoral rules.
don’t want to argue, just one thing:
“Exodus 21 demonstrates that neglect or abuse—specifically, the failure to meet basic marital obligations—constitutes a legitimate reason for divorce, even if not explicitly stated in Deuteronomy 24.”
if this were true, then Jesus would not be right… exodus 21 should not be used as an argument in favor of divorce, because it refers to completely different (and non-existent today and difficult for us to understand) relationships… my opinion is not that important, but if you really insist: Jesus is very clear, regardless of the context, that divorce can only be discussed in the case of adultery, and all other marital problems (abusing, toxicity, non providing food and clothes, …), no matter how extreme, should be resolved in other ways …especially when we consider that no marriage is without these problems and that God’s providence helps when we are obedient to Him
shalom
Jo, arguing in our context is legit (making our case) :-). Perhaps, we need to agree to disagree. Ex 21 is FULLY compliant with Jesus’ words for one very important reason that I think escapes you at the moment. And this is really the key. Jesus was NOT asked about the legitimacy of the divorce (as you currently think and is traditional). He was asked about the legitimacy of the ANY-REASON Pharisaic divorce pracitice! (that’s what I think). He, therefore, did not reply, defining the divorce in the Old Testament. Instead, he replied, criticizing ANY REASON FOR DIVORCE AMONG SOME PHARISEES. Hope this may help.
of course ex21 is compliant (God is not contradict), but this your interpretation is not…
no matter what He was asked about and no matter what you or i think about it, he DEFINED divorce
🙂 As I said its ok to disagee. Blessings and much peace.
agree 😃
berakhot rabim ve šalom
gam lecha, ach sheli!
This is a much needed teaching in today’s church. Many women and some men have needlessly suffered greatly having to stay in abusive marriages. Some having received poor advice from clergy have stayed to their death. Others were asked to stay in bad marriages because it would make the church look bad. Thank you for a word of deliverance..
Roberta, you are exactly right. I even know of a church where a wife, unable to divorce her husband in time, was brutally murdered (in their case I don’t think the leadership was to blame). She left behind two or three precious girls. This instance is, of course, an extreme example, but you are right; many people are suffering without realizing that our Lord desires something else for their lives.
And yet…. we have too many divorced couples! It’s so easy for people to just call it quits. Churches are so accepting of divorce now.. divorced deacons are allowed! Previously married catholic priests…. I could go on but.. I’m sure you get my point.. Making a case FOR divorce shouldn’t be our focus… but, how to save marriages, seek out help, stay connected to God, church etc… This is what I believe Christ would truly want.
Dear Rev. Rebekah Johnston, focusing on couples staying together whenever possible is critical (please read my article more carefully; I say all of those things). I am talking about situations of neglect and abuse that are prolonged and systematic. Church leaders are known for forcing people to endure years and years more of it all in the name of keeping their church divorce-free. Again, I know of a church where a couple did not separate soon enough, and the husband ended up murdering the wife in cold blood, leaving 3 kids behind.
Oh, thank you for this analysis that has sparked extensive discussion in Christian circles. After meditating on the scripture, I had reached the same conclusions as you, knowing that I have addressed this topic with people experiencing abuse in relationships.
Oh merci pour cette analyse qui a fait couler beaucoup d’encre dans les milieux chrétiens. Après avoir médité la parole, j’en arrivais aux mêmes conclusions que vous sachant que j’ai traité ce sujet avec des personnes en maltraitance dans les couples
People are hurting. Clear and Biblical teaching is very important.
If a man divorces his wife commits adultary against her and viceversa. This is clear. Not to me the grammar here: man’s an’s wife.” (Deut 24:
I enjoyed it!
Divorce is not the answer, is the consequence of not receiving or doing the part of the covenant of marriage. Example: God withdraw from protecting and feeding in the land, the people of the Northern kingdom and let them do as they pleased. They divorced from Him cause they rejected His love and care. They followed other god and did not change. If they would of change after all the prophets call… He did his part fully.
Thanks, Ana. Your first point: It was a typo, I fixed it 🙂
Thank you Ana!
Very interesting Dr. Eli. Thank you.
Just a few thoughts: It’s interesting that the Pharisees would use any and every opportunity to discredit Jesus before the people. This topic is probably the most delicate social and spiritual problem in all human history. As exemplified in the text, even the expert Pharisees were divided on the subject, and, it would appear, whatever pronouncement Jesus made regarding this question, he was sure to lay himself open to criticism. I think it is possible that there was probably more malicious intent behind their devious enquiry? If we look at the occasion of John the Baptist who openly and courageously criticises Herod’s marital status, which had cost him his life. They obviously hoped to get Jesus entangled in the same sticky situation and by what he said would eventually reach the ears of Herod. (Matthew 19:1 locates Jesus in Herod’s territory)
Pharisees are often cast as Jesus’ antagonists, yet the Gospels and Acts portray some favorably, adding theological depth.
Nicodemus seeks Jesus at night, confessing, “We know you are a teacher from God” (John 3:2).
He later protests unfair judgment: “Does our law condemn without a hearing?” (John 7:51).
Nicodemus anoints Jesus’ body with 75 pounds of spices, a royal honor (John 19:39).
Certain Pharisees warn Jesus of Herod’s threat (Luke 13:31).
Simon the Pharisee hosts Jesus for dinner (Luke 7:36).
Another Pharisee invites Him to Sabbath meal (Luke 14:1).
Gamaliel urges restraint against the apostles, arguing God may be at work (Acts 5:34–39).
Pharisees affirm resurrection hope, which Paul leverages (Acts 23:6–8).
Paul proudly recalls his Pharisee zeal and blamelessness (Phil. 3:5–6).
Pharisees praise Jesus’ impartiality: “You show no partiality” (Matt. 22:16).
These moments reveal Pharisees not as a monolith, but as individuals capable of respect, fairness, and faith.
Is there any way to have a private conversation on this matter?
I wrote you from my email.
👍 Yes, agree. Thank you.
Blessings!
Whoa! I have never read such deep insight and balanced approached to one of the problem of our society.
Thank you so much Dr. Eli.
Yeshua Bless you!
Thank you, my good brother! Friends, if any of you would like to help me to take this teaching to many more people please offer your help here – https://shorturl.at/NpBF7
Awesome!
Blessings!
Dr. Eli, this is another great article.
Growing up I suffered neglect, emotional, mental, and physical abuse by my father. My mom was sickly but tried to provide for her 5 children as best as she could since my father wouldn’t. She sought help from the church, but no one would help. My father would beat me, till he drew blood. I was ill and suicidal as young as 9. I was married twice to abusive men. My second husband got physical, raped me before I left him and he threatened me. So, I understand how awful it is to be in a home where a husband/father professes to be a Christian but controls everyone’s life in the home.
I’m free from all of that now, but I am constantly having to release those memories and trauma to God daily. And do a lot of crying and self-reflection.
Dear Abigail, thank you so much for opening up about your pain, past and present. May the Lord heal you as you continue to learn the Scriptures and realize that He is the defender of the fatherless and that he is the true husband of God’s people!
I also forgot to mention that my mother was brutally beaten about every single day by my father too and suffered severe injuries. And many times I tried to stop him, but in the process got beaten for trying to protect her.
So, I am so grateful that you wrote this particular article, since I still see this happening in many homes including my family.
I’m comforted to know the truth. And I bless you man of God, for your encouraging words and prayer.
Thank you, Abigail!
Very profound and exceptional. This leaves much food for thought. To conform or to relinquish ourselves to the world of YHWH.
Amen and amen. Nothing but the word of God!
Dr. Eli – I am so thankful for your emails – I read all of them and truly wish I could support you monetarily. I have been disabled for more than many years. Am now 70 and still unable to work. We have cancelled everything except insurance, cell phone and internet. Am unable to assist financially but I can and will continually support your wonderful work thru praying throughout each and every day. Always remember that both of our situations are in the hands of our Lord!! When my situation changes, you WILL be put on my list for financial assistance. No worries – the only other promise on my list is for Israel and ALL of our Jewish brothers & sisters – They are His chosen people and we must do whatever we can for each and every one. May His blessings, care, and protection continually be with you!!
Dearest Candace, I am very grateful to you and value your prayer more than you can possibly imagine. THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!!
What if the women abandons her husband emotionally, despise him publicly and hates him, treating him in such a way so she can be chased away from his house, this thing having the advantage of her being regarded as victim, while the truth in their intimate moments was that SHE WAS CONTINOUSLY REJECTING HIM?
Ariel, this abuse from wife to husband is much more common than realized. Sin happens both ways, and churches are sadly unequipped to defend the innocent in such cases.
I liked it from the first until the last word.
Thank you, Jan! Your encouragement and support mean a lot!
Dr Eli I am so glad for this article. It brings so much light and clarity on God’s Heart for the vulnerable by protecting them but also honoring the marital covenant. Todah Rabah. Blessings!!!
Amen and amen!
Dr Eli I am so glad for this article. It brings so much clarity on God’s heart for the vulnerable. To restore, to extend grace but in essence honoring the marital covenant. Yeshua brought it clearly when addressing the Pharisees.Todah Rabah! Blessings!!!
Blessings!
I love this final version. It causes me to think about how it could both heal and help so many suffering from the trauma of abuse, betrayal and neglect.
Bless you for this profound teaching.
Amen! Thanks be to our God!
I very much appreciate your detailed explanations about the words used and the cultural context of the various translations given to the original text. One thing that bothers me, however is the fact that while we accept the Old Testament statements as the word of God, it seems Jesus Christ, the very Word is being equated with the human interpretations of His statements. In that light, what am I to make of John 1:1-3?
I was surprised by your comment that John 8 was not found in ANY early manuscripts. Imagine what harm that reality could do to the argument about the inerrancy of the scriptures? Could you address that issue, possibly in another article, if not here? Thanks.
Samuel, I understand your concern. I remember the first time I discovered that the same was the case with the last verses of Mark 16 I was REALLY REALLY UPSET! But it is better that we know the truth; we can then adjust our doctrines to God’s truth. Not vice versa. Those of you who are interested in the standard doctrine of biblical inerrancy, explained. Here is a document to review: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/the-chicago-statement-on-biblical-inerrancy/
On Mal 2:16, I looked up the LXX, and I think it is clear there that it is not the Lord the God of Israel saying “I hate divorce”.
My Greek is not very good but I think the start of the verse is something like:
“But if hating you should put away, says [the] Lord the God of Israel, …”
Here “putting away” is an Aorist Active Subjunctive 2nd person singular, with the verb ‘hate’ as a participle (of antendant circumstance?) (which is the other way round from the Hebrew which has ‘hate’ as the finite form and ‘putting away’ as a infinitive construct).
correct. LXX supports NIV’s and mine 🙂 reading.
Thank you so much for clarity in this very hard and misunderstood topic.
There is room for forgiveness but we do not go back but forward toward the Prize.
I was writing a poem on forgiveness and I stopped to ask the Lord “ and the part about forget” and The Spirit spoke and said “ It means Let Go Without Regret”
But to apply that in the case of Divorce I have to say I have been bound by my own judgements and lack of knowledge.
Thank you, Kareena! May the Lord bless you richly!
I have been divorced since 2017 and it was because of abuse. He was not living up to his husbandly duties. I have wondered if I could remarry and this says if there was an issue then it would be okay. He was a scammer of money. He did not love me at all.
I am glad to provide for you much needed treatement of this topic! May the Lord bless you and give you new life and much hapiness!
{TEMPTING HIM} he question here is not the right to remarry, but only the right to divorce. The Pharisees wanted to know which side of the controversy Jesus was on. It was the prevailing custom to divorce and remarry times without number, hence the strategy was to make Jesus unpopular or even be killed by Herod as was John the Baptist. Jesus agreed with Shammai that fornication was the only exception. He did not change the Jewish universal practice that a right to divorce was a right to remarriage.
Sal, I have to take exception to your view. Blessings.
From a humorist perspective, one wonders why your surprise that this article would have brought such diverse comments!!
I recall that you were going to write on this topic some time ago, but I cannot imagine the HOURS of study & preparation for accuracy of your conclusions, truly a subject of grave sensibility & interpretation in many cultures, not just our Judeo-Chrisitan ones.
I found it SO interesting: the relations of various Hebrew Scriptures + the 2 leading thinkers before Jesus’ time, how they shed light on the NT authors’ statements of Jesus, AND the comments to date.
I had looked forward to your writing on this topic; I appreciate your article very much. Thank you.
Jane, you are such an encourager! This is truly needed! Thank you!
I have no problem with that.
Thank YOU, Dr. Eli! 🙂
Thank you, Jane for all you do!
I took your advice and not only re-read your article but picked up the recommended books for deeper study by David Instone- Brewer. Yes, my query for exegetical analysis of the text is 💯 % in agreement with your article.
Just to tax your thoughts I was leaning on the idea that the primary motive in the pool of any reason excuses for the divorce was simply to marry another or divorcing with the intention to marry another.
Anyways, much thanks to you Dr. Eli for delving into difficult texts and making them easier to grasp with proper biblical hermeneutics and exegesis.
Thank you, my brother! God bless you for going the extra mile and getting back to me.
I happened to read Malachi 2 yesterday and one if the sins God had against the people was that they treated their wives or families badly while appearing to be holy. Is it possible that Jesus may have been referring to this when he answered the pharisees. They had appearance of righteousness but treated people and their families badly. It was the same for Jesus time as it was in Malachi’s time
Sharon, I added Mal 2 section later. So, kindly review the post again. It now has a treatment of the “God hates divorce” argument.
Thank you very much, Dr. Eli. I truly appreciate your Scriptural writings, as they solidify your presentations. Without them, some might shrug off the writings as, “Well, that’s just one man’s opinion.” Indeed, Jesus stated in the New Testament: “…I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel….” If one were to have only the Old Testament or only the New Testament without the other, one would not have the complete Bible. May you continue to live under His abundant grace, mercies, and blessings.
Yours in Christ,
Ndugu Drew Bernard / Kenya
Thank you very much, brother Drew.
Thank you for this insight. Divorce is not pleasant.
Thank you for writing. Yes, no matter how justified the divorce may be, it is still very unpleasant and hurts everyone around. However, if the offended party leaves the marriage after the initial years of hurt, children will gain a view of a better model, where both participants in the marriage are not getting either neglected or abused.
🙏 for the explanation.
Blessings to you, Daniel!
When The Church is Jesus’ bridegroom that wedding will be accomplished soon in Heaven (Revelation 19:9), divorce is not expected because this is an analogy to our relationship with God Himself. We will definitely got some kind of loss because of divorce.
That’s also why Jehovah confirms that He hates divorce because of His deep love towards all mankind.
Praise the Lord.
Eddie, absolutely yes on your first part of the comment. Kindly look at the section BEFORE the conclusion entitled Does God hate divorce? It is an important section. Perhaps you did not see it yet. Blessings!
Thank you.
You are welcome, Dave!
Eli,
Thank you for allowing me to share with you my personal struggles. I feel like your “New” addition on divorce was a special gift to me, although I know others will benefit as well. In an interesting twist, I also got a notice from Reformation Heritage books today on two books, one on God’s forgiveness and mercy and the other on the comfort and promises of resurrection and eternal glory. Ordered both of them. Thanks again.
Dave, God loves you more than your wildest imagination can grasp! Thank you for your feedback. I am so happy to know that this means a lot to you.
Thanks Dr for this enlightening topic, am a Christian and divorced and remarried for ten yrs and was still struggling with the topic. You have certainly put it into perspective and made me have a better understanding and accept full restoration with my God. God bless and continue the great job you’ve been task with.
Thank you, dear Eric! Amen!
Lovely clear teaching
May the Lord bless you and keep you!
Shalom. In the return of Yshuah , Messiah, the Hisgalus or Revelation book prophesies no more marriage or remarriage. That is most clear to me. Marriage is a tricky situation. No wonder that ,in the end, Hshem our Abba, foresees and allows all discontinuity of any marriage. Eternal happiness from death and afterwards is found in Him, indeed, and not in any man or woman. So, while on Earth ,before death and His return/ eternal rule onwards, I shall not attempt to try any marriage. Whether married to a believer or not, it is a very temporal thing and the frustrations that can go along with this outweigh any physical pleasure or physical benefits whatsoever. Todah rabah and shalom.
Maria, your feedback, especially the last part of it, is very subjective, and I doubt that everyone will agree. 🙂
Possibly, you did not consider the fact that marriage is the very power of “be fruitful and multiply…” command (Genesis 1:28). If marriage becomes so optional, then, expecting any kind of fruitfulness and increase in the population of God’s creation becomes a joke. Consequently, this discussion wouldn’t have been taking place, because we wouldn’t be here! Our parents wouldn’t have given birth to us!!! Think again about that aspect, Maria. Me thinks whatever is happening to marriage now is humanity’s signature to the desires of the evil one concerning the overall fulfillment of the Will of God. Shalom!
Fantastic analysis!!! Thank you.
Thanks, Jefferis!
The command to “be fruitful and multiply” is quite different from the concept of marriage, and marriage does not always fulfil that command because there are happy and successful marriages without children. Adam and Eve were a perfect couple, far different from married couple in a fallen world. Please do not get them mixed up.
Thank you for your excellent article.
Blessings, Donna! Thank you for your encouragement!
Shalom Shalom, as always, your teaching brings clarity with purpose, insight and foundational understanding to some very often misunderstood scriptures. Yeshua Ha’Mashiach is KING of Kings, and “Context” is His Court !!!
Thanks you, Matthew! This means a lot! Blessinsg!
Thank you for this clarification. I always look forward to receiving and reading your blogs, as they give me spiritual insight and better understanding of the Words of God.
Marva
So glad to hear!
Much to say concerning my situation, yet it is not different from many others. It is my intent to transcribe this teaching for reference and teaching on this subject so “not understood” by so many. I hope Dr. Eli, that is acceptable by you. Even so, divorced, by my wife, in 2017, I declared that I would not remarry that i would not enter in adultry nor lead my estranged wife into adultrt. That is something that is a difficult path to walk.
Dear Don, have you read the article thoroughly? Do you disagree with it? If so, how, where, and why? Blessings!
Dr. Eli i agree with this teaching. My whole heart is to learn from it for the very subject has been a question in my mind. I have also encountered others having the same question. My response to them has been, “except for sexual immorality”. Only recently have i learned of abandonment.
My personal concern is the circumstances that led to the divorce, and my failures. It is a very long and complicated story.
Don, most diroces are long and complicated. You are not alone.
Dr. Eli, indeed im not alone, my family is riddled with divorce, I know many others who have been several times. Some have come to repentance and salvation. Im looking for my standing in God’s eyes. I will not remarry, though I desire to very much, until I , know the Lord my God has given it to me. Yet I still yearn to understand this issue, not just for my self, but for many who are struggling to understand.
As long as you know that you can remarry if your first marriage was brought to conclusion on biblical grounds.
Biblical grounds. Thats one question. Ive read your blog, I’ll read it again. Either there something im not seeing or im missing it. I do sense there is something not complete
Thank you, Dr. Eli! This writing is not only filled with clarity on this subject, but it also radiates love and compassion—just like Jesus.
Blessings to you!
So happy to hear that, Lori! May the Lord bless you richly!
Dear Dr. Eli,
I’m sorry, but your interpretation goes against sound hermeneutics and the view of the early church on this point. Go to churchwritings.com and do a search on the topic. Your view fits modern Christianity well, but not the words of Jesus or historic Christianity. Unfortunately, the 150 work limit doesn’t allow me to say more.
Dear Philip, You expressed many ideas, but none were substantial. At the very least, please kindly state one or two points where my interpretation contradicts established hermeneutical principles. Thank you for providing the website to access the writings of the Church fathers. Can’t wait to hear your substantial points.
Dr. Eli,
I tried to write more, but was informed the comment was too long. Jesus called the Pharisees back to the beginning. The way to approach Jesus’ teaching is to ask what God’s plan for marriage at the beginning was. Various concessions were made for the “hardness of heart” of the people, but now that the Holy Spirit is available with the power to live in the Spirit, God calls men to his original plan. The way to harmonize Mark and Luke with Matthew is not to negate the clear statements of Mark and Luke, but to carefully read and apply Matthew. See Wenham and Heth, “Jesus and Divorce”.
Providing me with references from other books and websites is not an argument. Please present an argument, and we can evaluate its validity.
Jesus agrees with Shammai, the only reason a man can divorce his wife is for sexual sin. However, Jesus and Paul do not teach that a divorce allows a remarriage. Grammarians have argued that the double conditional elliptical clause in Matthew 19:9 (except for fornication) applies to the divorce but not the remarriage. That is also how the Early Church, who were native Greek speakers, understood it. With the understanding that divorce is allowed for sexual immorality but remarriage is not, all the verses can be harmonized.
Thank you for your comment.
The words of Jesus set the Scriptures above Jewish (and any other) historical context, in order to make the Word applicable to all cultures around the world. Jesus if for all humankind (John 3:16). Severing the umbilical cord of Christianity from its Jewish cultural origins in order to make Christianity applicable to all cultures is a huge stumbling block for many Jewish Christians, but it must be overstepped. Thank you.
You stated “The collection of later writings we today call the New Testament was never meant as an alternative to the Old Testament:” Are you serious? Did you not read the sermon on the Mt. or the beatitudes? They lift the standard so much higher, from “law” to “grace” by the power of the Holy Spirit. When your premise is wrong, your conclusion is wrong.
This comes from the sermon you are referring to: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matt 5:17-18)
Christ came to fulfil the law and the prophets, that is essentially to reconcile all of mankind to God through Christ. The Old Testament is the history and record of how God demonstrates His love for mankind by selecting a faithful and obedient man, Abram and later Abraham, and promising him that He would bless the whole world through him (Genesis 22:15-18). That promise finds fulfilment in John 3:16, where Jesus declares that “…whosoever believes in Him …shall have everlasting life”, i.e. be reconciled to God. Thus God’s promise in the Old Testament is fulfilled in the New Testament. The two go in tandem.
Thanks for your article! I’m just concerned about your use of Exod21:7-11. This passage refers to a female minor (for adult female servants see Deut15:13-18). If the master appoints her to be his wife (is engaged to her), and then changes his mind, she can be engaged to his son. This means he hasn’t married her. If he doesn’t engage her to his son and still has her as a servant and takes another female, he is not to… This last part of v.10 is ambiguous. It can’t mean withholding conjugal rights, as she is not married to the master. However one interprets this, it isn’t wise to use an ambiguous verse as a foundation for doctrine/ethics. Fleeing abuse is covered by other verses. Whether this in itself constitutes grounds for divorce is difficult to substantiate biblically. Separation, however, can be supported.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment! While it’s true that Exodus 21:7-11 originally refers to the specific case of a female servant, many scholars and commentators recognize that these verses tie servitude laws directly to marriage customs of the time. As the text develops, her status often shifts from servant to wife or concubine, and the context of verses 10-11 supports protections regarding food, clothing, and conjugal rights even for those who transition into marriage. Although verse 10 is ambiguous, the underlying principle—ensuring protection from abuse and neglect, whether in servitude or marriage—remains significant. Even if not the sole foundation for divorce doctrine, this passage highlights the scriptural concern for justice and the well-being of the vulnerable, aligning with broader biblical safeguards for abused spouses.
Hello Dr. Eli,
I can’t express enough how much I appreciate your insights on biblical history. Your analysis contains truths and clarifications that are hard to find anywhere else.
Thanks again,
Ken
Ken, I am grateful for your kinds words! Thank you so very much!
I’ve heard interpretations about divorce, I have a question you may not have been asked, according to some interpretations: “Divorce is permitted ‘only for sexual immorality'” refers to the man, not the woman; that is, it refers to the woman, therefore forcing her to remain alone for the rest of her life. How do you explain this?
I am not sure I follow. Michael, what I currently think about divorce is what I wrote :-). Perhaps rereading this again (all the way) may help to nail down the argument. It is actually not very complicated at all.
Another question: A man who committed adultery, fathered children with three different women, abandons his wife with three children, mistreats her, and fails to provide her with food and other necessities, and divorces her to marry another woman—can that woman remarry another man who loves her?
I am so glad I am neither a rabbi nor a pastor. I am a humble biblical scholar. May the Lord give his guidance and grace to all who seek him and understand that Christ is their only hope.
What an insightfull -mind opener article dear Eli. I had very much welcome this in all possible ways, and the comments and responses added even further layers of deepness. WOW! Deeply appreciated.
Andres, thank you for your support and feedback!
Dear Dr. Eli, you occupy a very unique and important niche. Many pastors and rabbis are unable to divide the Word like you do. You are really a blessing.
I am grateful to share what I find with others.
Thanks so much! I’ve been looking into this subject in view of kerithuth, and shalach.
You are welcome, Spencer! Good timing.
Exactly how I’ve been teaching about divorce and remarriage for over 30 years! Thanks for even more detailed Hebrew exegesis!
So happy to hear, Raymond! Friends, if any of you would like to help me to take this teaching to many more people please offer your help here – https://shorturl.at/NpBF7
I wish I had this clear teaching when I was younger and a relatively new Christian. There was one young lady who was divorced who was interested in me and I in her. Because of my misunderstanding of Jesus’ teaching I didn’t get serious in my relationship with her. Sometimes decisions end up being permanent even though that is not the intent. I never married, certainly not the best outcome.
Robert, perhaps it’s time to look up that lady? Who knows?!
Your comment about Jesus using all of scripture, specifically the Hebrew scriptures which were already viewed as God’s Word at that time with the New Testament added in pieces later, is illustrated in Matthew chapter 5, verses 17-20.
Thank you, Robert.
May I have access to the previous articles in Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg’s blog?
Covid forced me to abandon weekly gatherings in our 55+ old folks subdivision. Our group was called “Coffee Cup Theology” and usually had 5 or 6 regular attendees. With Covid, I started sending emails on a more or less monthly basis. I am 84 and it takes me a while to crank out a reasonably coherent email. Through personal contact, more than 900 people willingly signed up to receive the emails.
Would it be acceptable for me to quote portions of some of your blogs in the emails I send?
Dear Jack, Absolutely! May the Lord use you in a powerful way!
Thank you very much. How do I access previous articles that I may have missed?
They are all in this section of the blog – https://drelisblog.com/blog/ (there categories there so you need to choose and at the button providing you are using computer you will see more pages with more articles).
Great exegesis. I like also the explanation of the Hebrew “soneh” and would love to understand better what indicates the implication of a lesser degree of love. Is it only the fact that God cannot “hate” his creation/people? And that He would not ask us to “hate” our father or mother? Or is this implication contained in the meaning of the word itself?
God can hate sin, and he asks us to hate it too :-), but I agree that at least in this case hate is not at all what we thought all along. Thank you for your comment Greg. God bless you!
Heartfelt Thank You Dr Eli,
This is a study that needed to be written, and a careful exposition that needed to be made.
It is so tragic that through lack of understanding of what the Scriptures actually say about this sensitive and delicate subject, that often those whose road is already painful enough due to a (Biblically) untenable relationship, are caused to suffer even more by those who use Scripture wrongly, and often with unnecessary condemnation, to speak more pain into their situation instead of releasing them from it.
I would like to see this taught in every church around the world to be honest.
Thank you so much again Dr. Eli, and may God bless you with His overflowing fullness.
Ps Steve Harris
Dear Pastor Steve, thank you so much. This means a lot. Indeed people are hurting.
As someone who divorced a man who constantly made her afraid and had his heart set on perversion and pornography , and although I tried for 7 years to make it work and to make myself better, thinner, inoffendable ect I’m so grateful for this msg. He has mental health issues and I’m glad to be free and feel guilty for feeling like this. I divorced him after he left me then wanted to come back. I didn’t let him come back. I have asked for forgiveness and I am remarried to a widower and although we both had trauma – this marriage is surrendered to God.. I’m so grateful for your msg as it’s been such a trauma and such a shame. Thankyou for reminding me of Gods mercy. My heart still hurts.
Hazel, yes this article is for hurting people whom God and His word can heal!
Dear Dr Eli,
With reference to your response to Alison Davies, “… we are talking about systematic, ongoing withholding of sex from the spouse over prolonged periods of time. In other words, something permanent, not something temporary and fixable.” Permit me to ask, at what point should a victim stop trying to fix the issue, and conclude that it is not fixable, then proceed to your recommended ‘divorce’?
There is no hard rule, of course. But what I have provided here is a general principle.
Thank you for the article!
What constitutes an “unbeliever leaving” ? Does addiction fall into this category?I have felt my H abuse and abandonment with the refusal to seek help, even after I physically separated and was asking . He refused. I then filed for divorce. He stalled for over a year to respond. Within me standing firm and filing in that year, he decided to get sober. So much pain and abuse though were inflicted in that time, and also broken trust. I’m constantly wrestling with these verses. I have not seen full repentance and surrender from him to the Lord for the abuse. Yet my church views me as the sinner for filing the divorce papers.
Your church viewing you as a sinner is a very common and sad thing in the body of Christ. But that is generally because they don’t know any better. They don’t mean it with any malicious intent. However, this behavior often causes a significant amount of pain. You do need to find a place for fellowship soon. Even if it means traveling further away for community :-(. Christ pains for you, longs for you, and loves you more than you can possibly dare to hope. Don’t worry you are His problem, he will heal you. Give it time.
Interesting comments regarding divorce and all with similar points. But what of polygamy. It seems the Lord never addressed this conflict. But are not Both Israel and the church bides of YHWH since Jesus is God?
Leonard, your question reflects a particular reading of Church and Israel—namely, that there is no organizational continuity between them. I take exception to that view. For example, I don’t believe the Church was “born” at Pentecost; I believe it celebrated its Bat Mitzvah. (A bar or bat mitzvah is a Jewish rite of passage into spiritual adulthood).
God bless you Dr. Eli..!
This is a great and interesting topic you have raised. There are instances whereby one of the two partners has to be in an isolation season, to be separated from another partner for God’s purpose for their lives, when God purposely do this by His wise counsel for a length of time known by God.
Will not the the other spouse takes this process as the refusal of conjugal rights and decides to end the marriage?
This is, of course, a very delicate matter. The Apostle Paul provides guidance on this in 1 Corinthians 7:5, indicating that a couple should not deprive each other sexually except perhaps by mutual consent (symphonou) for a limited time, devoted to prayer, so that they may come together again and not be tempted by Satan due to their lack of self-control.
Thank you for showing the grace and love extended to all of GOD’s children.
Amen!
Eli, this was very helpful to me. I stayed in an abusive marriage from 1992 until 2003 because of the misinterpretation of scripture that at that time made me believe if I divorced my spouse (who I thought was a true believer but who turned out to be a counterfeit convert), I was committing adultery.
During a time working abroad in Brazil, an American missionary pastor (himself divorced) helped me understand this was not the case — even though I divorced him for adultery, unfaithfulness can come in various forms).
Your further clarification has given me a degree of additional knowledge as it is a point of contention between various denominations of thought on the issue. Thank you!
Praise be to our God!
Very informative and I greatly appreciate the Jewish context for explaining. This does add so much clarity to an often murky situation. Thank you.
Thank you, Boaz.
I have found this insightful. Thank you for sharing.
Sure thing. Blessings!
Thank you Dr. Eli for a very well written article. You have highlighted serious matters of the ❤️ heart that are undeniable leading me to believe the issues of life flow from our hearts therefore the heart and eyes should be carefully guarded 🙏🤎🙏 when it comes to love and commitment. Continue to love in the face of heart break and disappointment yet do so carefully
🙏🌹🙏
Indeed. Thank you, Donita!
His disciples say unto Him, if the case of the Man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry, But He said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying save they to whom it is given . Matthew 19:10-11
Yes, pharisaic (hillelian) divorce became very common and it was difficult to stick to ONLY biblical grounds (as per my article).
Really good article, as usual 🙂
Just a note on John 8. Apparently there was in circulation as early as 80 AD an oral story about the sinful woman brought before Jesus. It may not be in the earliest manuscripts, but it does reflect the mercy of Jesus, as you have noted above. I will use this in pastoral care.
Eusebius concludes his account of Papias by saying that he relates “another account about a woman who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is found in the Gospel according to the Hebrews”.[32] Agapius of Hierapolis (10th century) offers a fuller summary of what Papias said here, calling the woman an adulteress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papias_of_Hierapolis
Hi, Jefferis! Thanks for weighing in. I also think it is a real story. I just don’t think it is original to the Gospel of John. It is essentially Agrapha. Scribes at some points decided to include this true story that did not originally make it into one of the four gospels. One way I know it was not original is because the phrase “scribes and pharisees” is used in the synoptic gospels but never in the Gospel of John! It is used only in that story :-), which to me is an indication that it was inserted in later.
How does remarriage work? Are you never to remarry?
Bern, if you were divorced on biblical grounds you are free to remarry.
I recently attended a meeting where an elder shared about a couple who had visited his congregation and having grown fond of the fellowship expressed a desire for membership. However after having met with them he unfortunately could not extend membership as they were both divorcees and seemingly their union was the direct cause of the end of their prior marriages. As expected they did not take this well as they both consider themselves to be believers and legitimately married. I am wondering, after reading the final paragraph of the article, how do we reconcile this with being free and forgiven if some see the sin as perpetual?
Ana, obviously one has to be careful to give advice based on short paragraph info like this. Provided divorce had legitimate biblical grounds (even if particular church leaders don’t know about them), this couple is legitimately married and probably should look for another church. Also, it would be nice to provide biblical evidence for the whole idea of church “membership” :-).
I know my ex and I have struggled with Christian beliefs. We had an organization interfere with our relationship, which twenty five years later realize the full ramifications of the divorce. The went as so far as tell me ex that your current marriage is null and void. The best way I could give her a weapon against these morons. Tell them I was clinically dead for 15 minutes, therefore I died and you were released from our marriage vows. Than as a Godly reassurance, I gave both her and her husband a prophet’s blessing.
Don’t know about the 15-minute rule 🙂 🙂 :-).
Thank you Dr Eli for your expounding of this topic. It helps to clarify my advise to my sister. She was for years in an abusive relationship. Her husband verbally and emotionally abused her. She was forbidden to have contact with her parents and sisters. She left him and came to me for advice. We prayed earnestly. She divorced him and is now walking with Jesus in a loving relationship with her new husband. No longer oppressed but able to care for her children with love and God’s guidance.
May God be praised!!!
Sadly with the ongoing manipulation of feminist women and the weak response by male leadership in the West today
It’s the women and the jezebel nature that is destroying marriage today
The dominance control manipulation through governments laws
Is taking a major foothold
Women are nearly untouchable
While this modern so called progressive ideology continues
I can’t see the west surviving
Greg, there is no doubt that in many Western countries white Christian men are demonized, cancelled, opressed, etc. But don’t give up; use all lawful means to turn the tide. In the USA people have done it already and freed themself from government overeach and elite’s woke nonsense. Now on a separate note: I don’t think that it is fair to say that all women destroy all marriages in our world. Plenty of men do that too. We need to be careful with our words.
Sadly, the majority of people in the majority of churches don’t understand this – even when divorce is God’s redemptive grace from a destructive marriage. The divorced and/or divorced and remarried are likely to carry the judgement and rejection of the community for the rest of their lives and live a marginalised Christian existence.
That is true. But God knows and his blessing and fellowship is what matters.
Thank you, Dr. Eli, for this thorough reading of the text and contextual considerations that inform and illumine our understanding of the wondrous expanse of God’s mercy and grace encompassed by the infinite dimensions of his divine love. Thanks be to God for his indescribable gift!
Amen and amen!
Thank You
finally someone made sense of the misunderstandings people have with all this…
Hate!
Amen
Blessings, my brother!
Hello Eli,
A more correct translation of Matthew 19:7-9:
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 put away your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. “And I say to you, whoever puts away his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman of a similar type commits adultery.
Updated link:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-U37vznSuyj2ilp5_4_Wq5A8JBsdZ-DS6D0WVWI6lvg/edit?tab=t.0
I also emailed you the paper with a longer comment.
Shalom shalom.
Thank you for sharing, Amy.
Lk 1:18-25. Joseph and Mary’s pregnancy came under Shammai’s interpretation of Deut 24:1 .
Jesus’ answer in Mat 19:9 confirmed Joseph’s initial attitude and decision towards Mary’s pregnancy while she was betrothed to him.
This is confirmed subsequently by Lk 1:25.
Thank you for your comment.
This is an intriguing piece. I think you are reading too many things into Ex 21:10-11. There was emphasis on the three things that will set a slave wife (a slave wife is most helpless and should not be confused with a normal wife – I think) free, but you added unintended expansion. In my view those three things most apply in cases of polygamy. Can you say something about polygamy? I agree the case of sexual immorality (does this really mean just adultery?) which actually has a penalty of death. Even though the person is not killed, she is dead before God, giving the husband the freedom to remarry, but in the context of the bible, can you just flip this over in the case of a man. especially where polygamy is practiced.
I am not reading into anything :-). I am applying a principle of “if it is true for a lesser, it is also true for greater.” I think you should rethink your comment. Poligomy is a topic that perhaps I will dedicate an article to. I don’t want to comment on this big issue in a short space.
Marriage was not meant for sinners. When Jesus referred to beginning, it was before sin came. All born after Gen3 are born sinners with stony hearts. Only people whose hearts have been converted from stony to fleshy can marry successfully. It is useless to ask two naturally selfish people to become one – impossible. Jesus through his sacrifice is bringing Ezek36:25-27 into reality. People whose hearts He truly converted can successfully marry without worrying permit for divorce. Unfortunately, the church is now full of couples with their stony hearts intact. That is why this matter matters and will remain a matter. Even if one is allowed to divorce or manages to keep a saltless marriage, will his stony heart make heaven? It looks like your piece is offering hard hearted people a means of expressing outwards, divorces that had happened inside, without affecting their consciences. God searches the hearts.
The comment blends partial truths with serious errors. Jesus states in Matthew 19:8 that lifelong, monogamous marriage was God’s design “from the beginning,” while divorce was a concession to human “hardness of heart.” This hard-heartedness is not the universal human condition but a specific sin of defiantly rejecting God’s will. While all are sinners (Romans 3:23), believers are given new hearts (Ezekiel 36:26) and called to reflect Christ’s covenant love in marriage (Ephesians 5:25-32). This is done imperfectly but through the Spirit’s power.
Scripture never claims only the perfectly “soft-hearted” can marry, or that divorce proves a lack of genuine faith. Grace enables obedience, not perfection. While warning against hard-hearted divorce is right, invalidating struggling marriages as inherently “stony-hearted” is not. God commands the forgiven to forgive, to marry, and to remain married (Colossians 3:13). The gospel empowers and transforms marriage; it does not reserve it for a spiritual elite.
That was awesome and informative thankyou
Blessings!
Shalom Dr. Eli. Thank you so much for this article. I still have a couple of questions though and would appreciate if you can clarify them for me. 1) You said in a previous comment that “Marriage binds until death; remarriage while the REAL spouse lives = adultery.” (November 20 at 11:35 AM). 2) You also commented that “1 Cor 7:15: if an unbeliever leaves, the believer is “not under bondage”—the bond is dissolved; remarriage is allowed.”
* Are you saying that remarriage should only be allowed when the other person is an unbeliever that leaves?
* What about if one commits adultery – is the one that did NOT commit adultery free to remarry since that person did not commit the adultery or still bound and not able to remarry?
Still not very clear to me about these remarriage questions.
Shalom and thanks in advance.
Blessings.
Perhaps, I was not clear enough before. If a person was divorced on biblical grounds, remarriage is legit and will be blessed by God.
tyvm Dr. Eli- I knew this in my heart anyway, as the Lord showed me. But I love God’s Word that seals the matter. I plan on giving another contribution in Jan. Once again I greatly appreciate you. Shalom!!!
Blessings, John!
Dear Dr. Eli, Why did Moses authorize the issuance of a divorce to an undesired wife? I read somewhere that after 430 years in Egypt, the Hebrews had adopted the Egyptian habit of poisoning an undesired wife in order to marry another. Thus, to prevent Hebrew men from killing their undesired wives, Moses allowed divorce by way of a letter, with far better consequences that eliminating them. Is there’s any historical factuality to this? Secondly, anywhere Jesus addressed this matter, he conjoined “divorce” and “remarriage”. Is that to mean that Jesus was referring to divorce because the person requesting the divorce has an eye on another potential spouse for remarriage? It’s difficult to accept that Christ was binding believers into the prison of an institution where one party can choose to be recalcitrant, incorrigible, non-cooperative or outright un-marriable. Please shed some light on this perspective. God bless.
Dear Friend,
Your historical query references an unverified tradition. Biblical scholarship suggests Moses’ divorce provision (Deut. 24:1-4) was a regulatory measure, curbing hasty dismissal and protecting women’s status in a patriarchal society, though Jesus later clarifies it was a concession to human hardness of heart (Matt. 19:8).
Yes, Jesus consistently links divorce and remarriage (e.g., Matt. 5:32, 19:9), identifying the intent to wed another as the core issue, which turns dismissal into adulterous injustice. He elevates marriage to its original, covenantal ideal. His teaching isn’t about imprisoning the abused but about condemning the selfish severing of a one-flesh union for personal convenience. The “exception clause” (Matt. 19:9) and Paul’s counsel (1 Cor. 7:15) show Scripture acknowledges situations where reconciliation is impossible, offering compassionate guidance amidst human brokenness.
God bless.
Your past articles have been greatly enriching, Dr. Eli, but this one distresses me. Can you explain how your teaching squares with the fact that practically all the early church writers—those who conversed in the biblical languages and natively understood the nuances of the culture—proscribed remarriage after divorce, a stance that endured for hundreds of years? In the Western Church, it didn’t gain a foothold until the time of King Henry VIII. Jesus’ command against remarriage in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 appears crystal clear. Paul’s use of δεδούλωται (bound, under bondage, enslaved) in verse 15 is illuminated by verses 3-4 and 33-34 of the same chapter. Matthew, writing to Jews, is the only gospel writer to include the exception for fornication (not adultery), and in verses 1:18-19, he alludes to the ancient Jewish custom requiring a divorce to end a betrothal. Thank you for considering my query!
Dear Mary, thank you for your thoughtful and respectful responce.
The early fathers (Hermas to Augustine) almost unanimously forbade remarriage while the first spouse lived, reading Mark/Luke as absolute and limiting Matthew’s πορνεία to incest or betrothal cases. Their near-unanimous voice is weighty and was a vital protection against the serial polygamy of Roman society.
Yet even they were not monolithic—Ambrosiaster (4th cent.) and later Eastern practice (oikonomia) allowed remarriage for adultery/abandonment. The difference today is not Henry VIII but fresh access to the 1st-century Hillel-Shammai debate unknown to most fathers. Jesus opposed “any-cause” divorce, not Shammai’s grounds (porneia); Paul explicitly releases the abandoned (1 Cor 7:15 οὐ δεδούλωται).
We honor the fathers’ protective zeal while believing Scripture itself permits remarriage when the covenant is already shattered by grave, unrepentant breach. Their strictness safeguarded the oppressed; the biblical text still offers hope of new covenant after such destruction.
Thanks for your prompt and thorough reply! More times than I would have liked, I’ve had to grapple with how to faithfully love friends and family members contemplating remarriage. But when I think about standing before Jesus’ judgment throne, I still feel most comfortable defending (according to His own words in 1 Corinthians 7:11) my simplistic understanding that a divorced person has only two options—to remain unmarried or else to be reconciled to his or her spouse—even if my perspective may be outdated. Though we disagree, Dr. Eli, I’m glad to know you’re carefully contemplating all sides of the issue and am grateful for the detailed explanations you gave me concerning the points I brought up. Shalom!
While I deeply respect your commitment to a plain reading of 1 Corinthians 7:11, I believe Paul’s instruction there addresses separation among believers without biblical grounds, urging reconciliation or celibacy to preserve the marriage bond. However, it doesn’t override Jesus’ explicit exception in Matthew 19:9, where sexual immorality (porneia) dissolves the one-flesh union, permitting divorce and freeing the innocent party to remarry without committing adultery.
Similarly, in cases of abandonment by an unbeliever (1 Cor. 7:15), the believer is “not bound,” implying release from the covenant. Your “simplistic” view is faithful in intent, but Scripture provides these merciful provisions for grievous breaches, reflecting God’s hatred of both divorce (Mal. 2:16) and hardened hearts (Matt. 19:8). Grace and peace as we both seek to stand faithfully before Him.
Thank you for your insight. The Hebrew background for Jesus’ words are indispensable. I was blessed with a beautiful 48 year marriage, but divorce is a fact in my family and our world that needs to be confronted.
Yes, it is never never never ideal.
This is undoubtedly the best article on divorce and Remarriage that I have read. No teacher has dismantled the parts of this “scary” topic as you have done. All my doubts are cleared now. More blessings to Dr. Eli.
Thank you so much. I simplified what Prof. David Instone-Brewer has argued (just want to be clear about that). But things do need to be said clearly. Blessings!