but I tell you that whoever puts away his wife, except for the cause of sexual immorality, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries her when she is put away commits adultery.
Parallel Translations
-
but I tell you that whoever puts away his wife, except for the cause of sexual immorality, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries her when she is put away commits adultery.
-
But I say vnto you: whosoever put awaye his wyfe, (except it be for fornicacion), causeth her to breake matrymony. And whosoever maryeth her that is devorsed breaketh wedlocke.
-
But I say vnto you, whosoeuer shall put away his wife (except it be for fornication) causeth her to commit adulterie: and whosoeuer shall marrie her that is diuorced, committeth adulterie.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Contradictions (1)
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
Cross-references (8)
Passages linked to Matthew 5:32 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Romans 7:3 So then if, while the husband lives, she is joined to another man, she would be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man.
- Luke 16:18 Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. He who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.
- 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 But to the married I command—not I, but the Lord—that the wife not leave her husband (but if she departs, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband not leave his wife.
- 1 Corinthians 7:4 The wife doesn’t have authority over her own body, but the husband. Likewise also the husband doesn’t have authority over his own body, but the wife.
- Matthew 19:8-9 He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it has not been so. I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery.”
- Mark 10:5-12 But Jesus said to them, “For your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man will leave his father and mother, and will join to his wife, and the two will become one flesh, so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” In the house, his disciples asked him again about the same matter. He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife, and marries another, commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband, and marries another, she commits adultery.”
- Malachi 2:14-16 Yet you say, ‘Why?’ Because Yahweh has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion, and the wife of your covenant. Did he not make you one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? Why one? He sought godly offspring. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. One who hates and divorces”, says Yahweh, the God of Israel, “covers his garment with violence!” says Yahweh of Armies. “Therefore pay attention to your spirit, that you don’t be unfaithful.
- Matthew 5:28 but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (11 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall…
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Ver. 32. Saving for the cause of fornication] Taken in the largest sense for adultery also. Adulteriam est quasi ad alterum, aut alterius locum. (Becman de Originibus.) This sill strikes at the very sinew, heart, and life of the marriage knot, and dissolves it. Further, it directly lights against human society, which the law mainly respects, and was therefore to be punished with death, as a most notorious theft. "Master," say they, "this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act." In the very theft, saith the original (ετ αιτπφωρω, Joh 8:4), to intimate, belike, the great theft that is in adultery, while the child of a stranger carries away the goods or lands of the family. Neither may any conclude from our Saviour’s words to that woman, {Joh 8:11} "Neither do I condemn thee," that adultery is not to be punished; any more than he may, that inheritances are not to be divided, because Christ, who was no magistrate, would not divide them, Luk 12:14. The marriage bed is honourable, and should be kept inviolable; society and the purity of posterity cannot otherwise continue among men; which is well observed by divines to be the reason why adultery is named in the commandment, under it all uncleanness being forbidden; when yet other violations are more heinous, as sodomy and bestiality.
Read full note →
Causeth her to commit adultery] Because it is God that both maketh and keepeth the bonds of wedlock, which is therefore called, "the covenant of God," Pro 2:17. Covenants are either, 1. Religious, as when a man tieth himself by vow to God, to shun such a sin or do such a duty. 2. Civil, between man and man, as in our common contracts, bargains, and businesses. Or, 3. Mixed, that are made partly with God and partly with man. And of this sort is the marriage covenant, the parties thereby tie themselves first to God and then to one another. Hence it is that the knot is indissoluble, and cannot be undone or recalled at the pleasure of the parties that make it, because there is a third person engaged in the business, and that is God, to whom the bond is made; and if afterward they break, he will take the forfeiture. This David understood, and therefore upon his adultery cried out, "Against thee, thee only" (that is, chiefly) "have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight," Psa 51:4. A sin it is against the Father, whose covenant is broken; against the Son, whose members are made the members of a harlot; and against the Holy Ghost, whose temple is defiled, 1Co 6:19.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain But I say unto you; that whosoever shall put…
But I say unto you; that whosoever shall put away his wife,.... Christ does not infringe, or revoke the original grant, or permission of divorce; only frees it from the false interpretations, and ill use, the Pharisees made of it; and restores the ancient sense of it, in which only it was to be understood: for a divorce was allowable in no case,
saving for the cause of fornication; which must not be taken strictly for what is called fornication, but as including adultery, incest, or any unlawful copulation; and is opposed to the sense and practices of the Pharisees, who were on the side of Hillell: who admitted of divorce, upon the most foolish and frivolous pretences whatever; when Shammai and his followers insisted on it, that a man ought only to put away his wife for uncleanness; in which they agreed with Christ. For so it is written (i),
Read full note →
"The house of Shammai say, a man may not put away his wife, unless he finds some uncleanness in her, according to Deu 24:1 The house of Hillell say, if she should spoil his food, (that is, as Jarchi and Bartenora explain it, burns it either at the fire, or with salt, i.e. over roasts or over salts it,) who appeal also to Deu 24:1. R. Akiba says, if he finds another more beautiful than her, as it is said, Deu 24:1 "and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes."''
The commentators (k) on this passage say that the determination of the matter is, according to the school of Millell; so that, according to them, a woman might be put away for a very trivial thing: some difference is made by some of the Jewish doctors, between a first and second wife; the first wife, they say (l), might not be put away, but for adultery; but the second might be put away, if her husband hated her; or she was of ill behaviour, and impudent, and not modest, as the daughters of Israel. Now our Lord says, without any exception, that a man ought not to put away his wife, whether first or second, for any other reason than uncleanness; and that whoever does, upon any other account,
causeth her to commit adultery; that is, as much as in him lies: should she commit it, he is the cause of it, by exposing her, through a rejection of her, to the sinful embraces of others; and, indeed, should she marry another man, whilst he is alive, which her divorce allows her to do, she must be guilty of adultery; since she is his proper wife, the bond of marriage not being dissolved by such a divorce: and
whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery; because the divorced woman he marries, and takes to his bed; is legally the wife of another man; and it may be added, from Mat 19:9 that her husband, who has put her away, upon any other account than fornication, should he marry another woman, would be guilty of the same crime.
(i) Misn. Gittin, c. 9. sect. 10. Vid. T. Hieros. Gittin, fol. 49. 4. & Sota, fol. 16. 2. & Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 9. fol. 195. 2. (k) Maimon. & Bartenora in Gittin, c. 9. sect. 10. (l) T. Bab. Gittin, fol. 90. 2. Maimon. Hilch. Gerushin, c. 10. sect. 21, 22.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain Causeth her to commit adultery - If she marry…
Causeth her to commit adultery - If she marry again.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 32. Saving for the cause of fornication] λογου…
Verse 32. Saving for the cause of fornication] λογου πορνειας, on account of whoredom. As fornication signifies no more than the unlawful connection of unmarried persons, it cannot be used here with propriety, when speaking of those who are married. I have therefore translated λογου πορνειας, on account of whoredom. It does not appear that there is any other case in which Jesus Christ admits of divorce. A real Christian ought rather to beg of God the grace to bear patiently and quietly the imperfections of his wife, than to think of the means of being parted from her. "But divorce was allowed by Moses;" yes, for the hardness of their hearts it was permitted: but what was permitted to an uncircumcised heart among the Jews, should not serve for a rule to a heart in which the love of God has been shed abroad by the Holy Spirit. Those who form a matrimonial connection in the fear and love of God, and under his direction, will never need a divorce. But those who marry as passion or money lead the way, may be justly considered adulterers and adulteresses as long as they live.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Excepting the cause of fornication. A divorce or separation…
Excepting the cause of fornication. A divorce or separation as to bed and board, may be permitted for some weighty causes in Christian marriage; but even then, he that marrieth her that is dismissed, commits adultery. As to this, there is no exception. The bond of marriage is perpetual; and what God hath joined, no power on earth can separate. See again Matthew xix. 9. (Witham) --- The know of marriage is so sacred a tie, that the separation of the parties cannot loosen it, it being not lawful for either of the parties to marry again upon a divorce. (St. Augustine, de bon. conjug. chap. vii.) (Bristow)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put…
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery--that is, drives her into it in case she marries again.
and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced--for anything short of conjugal infidelity.
Read full note →
committeth adultery--for if the commandment is broken by the one party, it must be by the other also. But see on Mat 19:4-9. Whether the innocent party, after a just divorce, may lawfully marry again, is not treated of here. The Church of Rome says, No; but the Greek and Protestant Churches allow it.
Same Subject Illustrated from the Third Commandment (Mat 5:33-37).
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 32. But I say unto you — Our Lord…
32. But I say unto you — Our Lord has quoted the words of Moses, and seems to oppose them with this but. Yet it is not the law in its purity which he quotes and corrects. He does not oppose Moses. But what he does oppose and correct is that law as it is uttered by the mouth of those who quote it for licentious purposes, making it the means of all that dissoluteness described in our note on Mat_5:31. That licentiousness he corrects by limiting divorce to cases of adultery; or rather he restores this provision as the true intent of the law of Moses. Causeth her to commit adultery — The dismissing a wife for other cause than unfaithfulness, did not dissolve the marriage. Yet, as by unlawful custom she could marry again, in such cases the husband dismissing her occasioned the adultery. Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced — That is, thus unlawfully divorced, and so not divorced at all. Committeth adultery — By marrying her who is still bound by an unbroken marriage tie to her former husband, who has unlawfully dismissed her.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 32. causeth her to commit adultery] By adopting a…
32. causeth her to commit adultery] By adopting a slightly different reading in the original with Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Tregelles, the idea of wilful sin on the woman’s part is removed.
that is divorced] Lit. when she hath been divorced.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (32) Saving for the cause of fornication.—The most generic…
(32) Saving for the cause of fornication.—The most generic term seems intentionally used to include ante-nuptial as well as post-nuptial sin, possibly, indeed, with reference to the former only, seeing that the strict letter of the Law of Moses made death the punishment of the latter, and so excluded the possibility of the adultery of a second marriage. The words causeth her to commit adultery imply that the “putting away” was legally a divorce à vinculo, leaving the wife, and à fortiori the husband, at liberty to marry again; for otherwise she could not have incurred the guilt of adultery by a second marriage: but it asserts that in such a case, when divorce was obtained on any other ground than the specific sin which violated the essence of the marriage contract, man’s law (even that of Moses) was at variance with the true eternal law of God.
Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced.—The Greek is less definite, and may be rendered either “a woman who has been put away,” or better, “her when she has been put away.” Those who take the former construction, infer from it the absolute unlawfulness of marriage with a divorced woman under any circumstances whatever; some holding that the husband is under the same restrictions, i.e., that the vinculum matrimonii is absolutely indissoluble; while others teach that in the excepted case, both the husband and the wife gain the right to contract a second marriage. The Romish Church, in theory, takes the former view, the Greek and most Reformed Churches the latter; while some codes, like those of some countries in modern Europe, go back to the looser interpretation of Deu_24:1, and allow the divorce à vinculo for many lesser causes than incontinence. Of these contending views, that which is intermediate between the two extremes seems to be most in harmony with the true meaning of our Lord’s words. The words “put away” would necessarily convey to His Jewish hearers the idea of an entire dissolution of the marriage union, leaving both parties free to contract a fresh marriage; and if it were not so, then the case in which He specially permits that dissolution would stand on the same level as the others. The injured husband would still be bound to the wife who had broken the vow which was of the essence of the marriage-contract. But if he was free to marry again, then the guilt of adultery could not possibly attach to her subsequent marriage with another. The context, therefore, requires us to restrict that guilt to the case of a wife divorced for other reasons, such as Jewish casuistry looked on as adequate. This, then, seems the true law of divorce for the Church of Christ as such to recognise. The question as to how far national legislation may permit divorce for other causes, such as cruelty or desertion, seems to stand on a different footing, and must be discussed on different grounds. In proportion as the “hardness of heart” which made the wider license the least of two evils prevails now, it may be not only expedient, but right and necessary, though it implies a standard of morals lower than the law of Christ, to meet it, as it was met of old, by a like reluctant permission.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain For full notes, cf. Mat_19:9. Parallel passages: Mar_10:12 Luk_16:18;…
For full notes, cf. Mat_19:9. Parallel passages: Mar_10:12 Luk_16:18; apparently the context of Mark represents Mat_19:1-8, and the context of Luke rather represents Mat_5:18. Notice here:
(1) Matthew alone, in both places, gives the exception of fornication.
Read full note →
(2) St. Paul refers in 1Co_7:10, 11 to this saying of our Lord"s.
(3) The laxity in this matter of the Hillel school of the Pharisees is well known.
Their theory, indeed, sounds good, viz. that there should be perfect unity in the marriage state; but starting from this premise they affirmed that if in any single respect the unity was not attained, divorce might follow. For examples, see Lightfoot ("Hor. Hebr."). Our Lord upholds the school of Shammai. It is said that shameful laxity in divorce still exists among Oriental Jews. Fornication. The reference is to sin after marriage. Contrast Deu_22:20, Deu_22:21, where the husband"s action is not thought of as divorce. The more general word (porneia) is used, because it lays more stress on the physical character of the sin than moiceia would have laid. Causeth her to commit adultery; Revised Version, maketh her an adulteress, since the right reading, moiceuyhnai , connotes being sinned against rather than sinning (Received Text, moicasyai). (For the thought, Rom_7:3) And whosoever shall marry, etc. Bracketed by Westcott and Hort, as omitted by certain "Western" authorities (especially D and Old Latin manuscripts). (On the importance of the "Western" group in cases of omission, vide Westcott and Hort, 2. cf. also Mat_9:34, note.) The clause closely resembles cf. Luk_16:18. Her that is divorced; i.e. under these wrong conditions, as Revised Version, her when put away. even though authn is not expressed. This interpretation, notwithstanding Weiss"s stigma of it as "ganz willkurlich," is surely only a plain deduction from the preceding clause. The fact that no such limitation is to be found in Luk_16:18 must not prejudice our judgment here.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 5:32 The exception clause permits but does not demand…
5:32 The exception clause permits but does not demand divorce when one partner has been unfaithful (see also 19:9). Notably, Jesus does not demand death for the guilty party (see Deut 22:21-22). • The implication seems to be that by divorcing his wife for illegitimate reasons, the man causes her to commit adultery by wrongly putting her in a situation where she remarries and so breaks the law. • anyone who marries a divorced woman: It is not clear whether Jesus is referring to any woman who is divorced, regardless of the reason, or only to a woman who is divorced without an acceptable reason (unfaithfulness). The underlying assumption in Jewish divorce law was simple: Legitimate divorces permitted remarriage.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.