Divorce & What Jesus Really Says | Matthew 5:31-32
This message was preached at Sherwood Community Friends Church on Sunday, February 16, 2025. You can watch the video in full by clicking below.
Recap
Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount is a set of building blocks, designed to pierce into the hearts of his audience. His hope is to bring his audience back into the relationship with God that they were always meant for.
First, he lays down the foundation, targeting the identity of those in his audience by reminding them who they are according to the Covenant through the Beatitudes and the call to be salt and light.
Next, he is targeting the heart by addressing hot topics of the day. First, anger. Then adultery. And, in today’s passage, the topic of divorce.
Jesus isn’t about behavior modification. He’s after heart modification.
Jesus clarifies both the law and the practice of divorce. He addresses the misplaced allegiance & displaced loyalty of his audience, redirecting their focus from the law to creation’s intent. He peels back the veil of obligatory obedience to black-and-white laws to emphasis loyalty. And Jesus pushes us to see people as sacred, to see people as image bearers not objects for our discard.
Jesus’ Words
We start with the words of Jesus in Matthew 5:
“It was also said, Whoever divorces his wife must give her a written notice of divorce. But I tell you, everyone who divorces his wife, except in a case of sexual immorality, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. Matthew 5:31-32
At first glance, these words of Jesus can be confusing and even feel harsh. This seems to only be addressing the men and that women don’t have a say in the matter. Second, how does the wife being divorced subject her to be the one committing adultery, when she has no say in the ending of her previous marriage?
How do we reconcile this teaching with the character of Jesus—one who is full of grace, mercy, and compassion? How do we understand this in light of the One who defends the oppressed and lifts up those burdened by shame?
For some, this passage has been a source of pain. It has been used, at times, to keep people trapped in abusive or neglectful marriages, compelling them to stay in harmful situations out of fear of condemnation.
And it’s not only been husbands who have lorded this over their wives, but there have been some churches even who have used what little there is in the Bible on divorce to keep women in oppressive, abusive, and neglectful relationships.
This is heartbreaking because Jesus’ words were never meant to be weapons of control or shame.
And I want to take a moment to acknowledge this pain. If you experienced this in your story, I am so sorry that you had to endure the weaponizing of scripture to keep you in an ungodly and unholy marriage.
When we look at the whole of the scriptures, we know that God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are advocates for the weak, seek to bring honor to the humble, and justice for the captives.
So, what’s really going on here? How do we approach a teaching that feels so heavy and difficult and misunderstood?
The key is to understand the context. As we often say around here, The Bible was written for us, but the Bible wasn’t written to us. This means that while God’s truth is timeless and relevant for our lives today, the original audience of these words was hearing them through the lens of their own cultural norms, societal structures, religious teachings, and liturgical practices. We have the work then of using a critical analysis to understand how this applies to us today.
Deuteronomy
First, we jump back to the Old Testament. Remember, the audience for the gospel of Matthew was written to was primarily a Jewish audience. So when Jesus says “It was also said,” they know what he’s referencing, which is Deuteronomy 24:1-4:
“If a man marries a woman, but she becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, he may write her a divorce certificate, hand it to her, and send her away from his house. If after leaving his house she goes and becomes another man’s wife, and the second man hates her, writes her a divorce certificate, hands it to her, and sends her away from his house or if he dies, the first husband who sent her away may not marry her again after she has been defiled, because that would be detestable to the Lord. You must not bring guilt on the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
According to Amy-Jill Levine, the bottom line of this passage is that a divorced woman cannot return to her first husband after she has remarried. It’s not that she is unclean or defiled for all future marriages, but only in returning to her first husband.
This wasn’t so much about the woman being unclean or unfaithful. It was more of a protection for the woman, that her husband wouldn’t discard her for another woman or simply because he was tired of her, then later decide that he wants his first wife back.
But what about this line about her becoming displeasing to him because of something indecent?
For a long time, church history has understood this passage of the situation between the first husband and the wife has always been straight to adultery in some form because of this phrase:
דבר עֶרְוָה
Pronounced: ervat davar
The discussion around this matter is around ervat davar and its translation. Literally, it’s translated as “nakedness of a thing or matter” which then is understandable why it may be viewed as for matters of sexual impropriety. But this terminology is used elsewhere in scripture in contexts not relating to sexual impurity.
Deuteronomy 23: 12-14: “You are to have a place outside the camp and go there to relieve yourself. You are to have a digging tool in your equipment; when you relieve yourself, dig a hole with it and cover up your excrement. For the Lord your God walks throughout your camp to protect you and deliver your enemies to you; so your encampments must be holy. He must not see anything indecent {ervat davar} among you or he will turn away from you.”
Because we see this phrase used with regard to simply matters that are unclean, unrelated to sexual impurity, then we must take ervat davar to mean anything that would be considered “undesirable” - unworthy of being in the Lord’s presence.
What is unworthy of being in the Lord’s presence?
One example is found in Proverbs.
Proverbs 6:16-19 “The Lord hates six things; in fact, seven are detestable to him: arrogant eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that plots wicked schemes, feet eager to run to evil, a lying witness who gives false testimony, and one who stirs up trouble among brothers.”
And another in Isaiah.
Isaiah 5:20-23 “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness, who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Woe to those who consider themselves wise and judge themselves clever. Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, who are champions at pouring beer, who acquit the guilty for a bribe and deprive the innocent of justice.”
And there are more that we could pull from.
The point of these passages and more is that when we consider what is ervat davar, we can consider anything that gratifies and lifts up an individual while holding others down in oppression is indecent and should not be considered righteous. This is not the way of the Lord.
The Great Debate
Ok, so we understand what Deuteronomy is saying, which helps us with SOME of the context of what Jesus is talking about in Matthew 5.
But why is this matter even one that Jesus feels compelled to talk about in his most well-known and longest sermon? Especially so early on in the sermon? There are so many other matters, aren’t there? Money, power, control, serving others. He could have given a how-to heal people or how to tell parables for teaching. The list is great of matters and skills that Jesus could have chosen to teach on.
Why divorce?
Well, Jesus’ statement is actually a part of a larger debate, which we see more clearly in Matthew 19:3-9:
Some Pharisees approached him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife on any grounds? ”
“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that he who created them in the beginning made them male and female, and he also said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
“Why then,” they asked him, “did Moses command us to give divorce papers and to send her away?”
He told them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of the hardness of your hearts, but it was not like that from the beginning. I tell you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another commits adultery.”
This was a debate that was heated and polarizing in His time. The Pharisees weren’t asking this question out of genuine curiosity. They were trying to trap Him, hoping He would say something controversial that would discredit Him or alienate parts of His audience. This isn’t the first time they attempted this tactic. We see it in other instances:
When they brought to Him the woman caught in adultery, hoping to pit Him against the Law of Moses.
When they questioned Him about healing on the Sabbath, trying to accuse Him of breaking Sabbath laws.
When they asked about paying taxes to Caesar, attempting to catch Him in a political trap.
When they asked which of the 613 commandments was the greatest, hoping to ignite theological debate.
This time, the trap was about divorce. And this wasn’t just a casual theological debate—it was a significant cultural controversy. The question the Pharisees posed was deliberately designed to force
Jesus to take a side in a longstanding argument between a few influential schools of thought, thus also dividing his followers. Let’s look at two of them.
The first is the House of Shammai, led by Rabbi Shammai. This school took a strict interpretation of the law. They believed divorce was only permissible in cases of unchastity or serious moral failure. They interpreted Deuteronomy 24:1 to mean that a man could divorce his wife only if he found something “indecent” in her, which they understood as sexual immorality. This was the more conservative view, emphasizing the sanctity and permanence of marriage.
On the other side was the House of Hillel, led by Rabbi Hillel, which took a more lenient stance. They argued that a man could divorce his wife for almost any reason, interpreting “indecent” to mean anything he found displeasing. This could be something as trivial as burning a meal or as subjective as losing attraction. This more permissive interpretation was the more popular view of the time because it favored men’s authority and autonomy.
Here are a few other cultural dynamics at play.
In that society, divorce was largely in the hands of men. This is according to the customs and societal understandings of the day, both in Deuteronomy & in the Gospels. A husband held the legal right to initiate divorce. This meant that under the House of Hillel’s interpretation, women were particularly vulnerable, as they could be divorced for virtually any reason without say.
However, women were not entirely powerless. There are historical examples of women initiating divorce, such as Salome and Herodias according to Josephus a first-century historian. But these were rare exceptions involving women of high social status and wealth. For the average woman, the possibility of initiating a divorce was highly improbable.
Additionally, Jewish women had marriage contracts known as a ketubah, which served as a form of economic protection, like a pre-nuptual agreement. These contracts ensured that if a woman was divorced, she would receive financial support. Both schools of thought recognized these contracts, which means that while divorce was stigmatized, women were not necessarily left destitute.
So we are walking into a complicated and heated debate. This was a high-stakes conversation. The Pharisees weren’t merely curious about Jesus’ interpretation of the law. Again, they were trying to pull Jesus into one of two camps, sparking disunity and division.
Jesus’ Insistence => Creation
So what is Jesus’ stance in the middle of this heated argument?
“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that he who created them in the beginning made them male and female, and he also said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
Jesus doesn’t take the bait. Instead, He reframes the entire debate, pointing back to God’s original design for marriage—a lifelong, committed union reflecting God’s faithfulness and love. The first passage Jesus references is:
Genesis 1:27 “So God created man in his own image; he created him in the image of God; he created them male and female. ”
And the second is:
Genesis 2:24 “This is why a man leaves his father and mother and bonds with his wife, and they become one flesh. ”
Levine says this: “Jesus grounds his teaching not in social reform but in Genesis…Jesus responds, not by citing social engineering, women’s rights, or the latest poll. …He responds by citing Genesis.”
Jesus’ response sets the stage for his radical call to a deeper righteousness—one that goes beyond legalism and cultural norms to reflect God’s original intent for relationships.
The design was to be male and female, joined together as one flesh. Jesus is clear and unwavering in his stance.
Yet we might be wondering exactly what the Pharisees asked:
“Why then,” they asked him, “did Moses command us to give divorce papers and to send her away?”
Let me put it another way….So if God’s original design was for man and woman to not be separated, then why was it allowed by Moses in the first place? Why was it ok enough to be even included in the Torah, the law?
He told them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of the hardness of your hearts, but it was not like that from the beginning. I tell you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another commits adultery.”
This was a wilderness concession. The Israelites, like us, had a tendency toward disloyalty, not only to God but to each other. Shortly after they entered the Promised Land, after 40 years in the wilderness, they go right back to their own ways.
Judges 2:11-12 “The Israelites did what was evil in the Lord’s sight. They worshiped the Baals and abandoned the Lord, the God of their ancestors, who had brought them out of Egypt. They followed other gods from the surrounding peoples and bowed down to them. They angered the Lord.”
Jeremiah 3:20 “But as a woman may betray her lover, so you have betrayed me, house of Israel. This is the Lord’s declaration.”
Hosea 4:1 “Hear the word of the Lord, people of Israel, for the Lord has a case against the inhabitants of the land: There is no truth, no faithful love, and no knowledge of God in the land!”
And this disloyalty continues until the Lord can no longer protect his people because they have so far removed themselves from him, and eventually they are carried away into exile.
Yet, loyalty is at the core of who we are meant to be. We are made in the image of God, and faithfulness is the very essence of God!
Deuteronomy 7:9 "Know that the Lord your God is God, the faithful God who keeps his gracious covenant loyalty for a thousand generations with those who love him and keep his commands."
Psalm 89:33 "But I will not withdraw my faithful love from him or betray my faithfulness."
Even after the exile, we see God remains faithful to his people.
Nehemiah 9:31 "However, in your abundant compassion, you did not destroy them or abandon them, for you are a gracious and compassionate God."
This disloyalty of the Israelites snaked its way from an ambiguous characteristic of a large group into real-life homes of men who were discarding their wives, stepping out on them, or growing tired of the relationship. They were disloyal, so Moses conceded with clarity and regulation. Not for the oppression of the wife, but for her safety.
But that said, loyalty must be our clear centerpiece—faithfulness to one another because this is our very embodiment of the Father.
It is not merely about avoiding divorce but about cultivating a steadfast, covenantal love that mirrors God’s faithfulness to His people.
In marriage, loyalty reflects God’s unwavering faithfulness, offering the world a picture of a love that endures.
I also know that some are called, for short-term or long, to a season of singleness. This does not discount your call to loyalty. This might be loyalty to your family or a close friend.
Of course, we each, no matter of our marital status, have a call of loyalty to our God. But even Jesus himself said that one of the greatest commandments is to “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Loyalty to the people God places in our life, through marriage, family line, or friendship bonds, is as important to God as loving him with our whole being.
With the Pharisees, Jesus sides with the stricter viewpoint of only allowing divorce for adultery because he is aligning with God’s covenant loyalty. He brings the focus back to God’s ideal instead of getting caught up in the political debate of the time. By grounding His teaching in the creation narrative, Jesus elevates the discussion above legal loopholes and cultural arguments. He challenges His listeners to consider the heart of marriage, the purpose of covenant, and the necessity of faithfulness.
Jesus also honors women by affirming the high value of marriage. In a society where women were often marginalized and easily discarded through divorce, Jesus’ words were always meant to protect women from exploitation.
Jeannine K. Brown notes, “The call to lifelong marriage is a high expectation, and it is also an implicit affirmation of the worth and importance of women in the Kingdom.”
Jesus’ teaching not only upholds the sanctity of marriage but also the dignity of women, recognizing and giving voice to how it was intended to be from creation.
Let’s take a moment and look at our main passage again.
“It was also said, Whoever divorces his wife must give her a written notice of divorce. But I tell you, everyone who divorces his wife, except in a case of sexual immorality, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. Matthew 5:31-32
Hmmm… what is this line… “causes her to commit adultery?”
Well, let’s look at another translation. When we look at this passage in the NIV, we see a clearer picture of what is attempting to be communicated.
“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” Matthew 5:31-32 NIV
Notice the difference. “He makes her a victim of adultery” versus “he makes her commit adultery”—the difference in translation comes down to Greek grammar. All translations aim to communicate this idea, but the NIV captures it best in this context. The woman does not have a choice but is instead put into the role of the victim when she is cast aside by her husband.
On the note of Bible translations: Does this mean that the CSB, the main version we use here, isn’t a viable translation? Not at all. No matter which English translation you use, they are all translations from the original text and language. This is why it’s best to have available a variety of translations. Fortunately, we live in a time when we can access hundreds of them for free in one app - the Bible app, also called YouVersion. If you need help getting that set up on your phone, let us know.
Neglect, Abuse, & Harm
Back to our subject.
Loyalty is at the heart of God’s design for marriage, but applying that loyalty requires biblical wisdom, especially in complex situations. We need to listen to both the wisdom streams of Scripture and practical wisdom as we navigate real-life circumstances. It’s not about rigidly applying black-and-white rules but about discerning how to live out covenant loyalty faithfully.
What about situations of neglect, abuse, or other forms of harm within marriage?
Jesus doesn’t address these scenarios in clear, distinct words, but we do know that marriage was created to be a representation of covenantal love– a call to love others and love God. The design was never intended to enable harm.
Biblical wisdom calls us to engage these questions with compassion and courage, resisting the trap of falling into religious dogma.
It’s crucial that we ask how the state of the marriage is impacting both the man and the woman, not just one party. Loyalty to God’s design does not mean blind loyalty to a broken human relationship. It means seeking redemption, healing, and wholeness, even when that path is messy and complicated.
It may mean supporting separation or divorce when safety and dignity are at stake.
As the church, we must step in to protect the vulnerable, to offer safe spaces, and to provide wise counsel. This includes walking alongside those who are hurting, helping them navigate the difficult waters of loyalty and justice. We are called to embody God’s faithfulness, reflecting His mercy and grace in every relationship.
Conclusion
Ultimately, Jesus’ response is not merely about rules but about restoring the heart of covenant loyalty. It’s about living out God’s faithfulness in our relationships, mirroring the divine design of creation. Jesus calls us back to God’s original intent—not to burden us with rigid regulations but to redeem divine loyalty in us, even in a broken world.
In a world of broken promises and fractured relationships, we are invited to reflect God’s unwavering faithfulness. May we be people of covenant loyalty, showing mercy, offering grace, and living faithfully to one another as God has been faithful to us.
So what is the call for us today?
Specifically on the subject of divorce, we live in a society when the tables are turned. It’s not only the man who has the right or ability to get a divorce. But both men and women have a responsibility to treat the other with covenant loyalty, not simply as objects to be used and discarded for our benefit.
Be people of righteousness and justice. Do the right thing to lift others up. Avoid ervat davar, the unpleasing actions that the Lord will not be around. This is especially true for the closer people are to you. Give the benefit of the doubt when it would be easier to take offence. Extend the arm of loyalty as your default.
When in unclear situations and you aren’t sure what the Bible has to say, or when what you think the Bible says just doesn’t seem to fit with the character of God, review the whole of scripture to embrace Biblical wisdom for your circumstances. Seek wise counsel. Pray for revelation. And trust that God’s goodness is what prevails.
