Marriage & Divorce: What Does Jesus Say?
Something I have seen quite a bit of contention on is the concept of divorce in a Christian relationship. Is divorce permitted? Well, what does the Bible say, in all of its context? Matthew 5:32 feels like quite the layup to me: “But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the grounds of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” There is quite a bit to unpack in this one verse alone, but context is always important in the Bible.
Matthew 5 is the opening chapter of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7), which is among my favorite passages of Scripture. There is a wealth of knowledge in these three chapters, and the fact that Jesus chooses these topics when speaking to the masses is fascinating. This sermon is recorded in the Gospel of Matthew. Jesus is teaching His disciples with a large crowd present on a mountain after seeing the multitudes. It is one of the most widely discussed and debated passages because of the abundance of teaching it contains. This includes (but is not limited to) the Beatitudes, the salt-and-light teachings, Jesus’ relationship to the Law, and much more.
In Matthew 5:17–20 we see Jesus discuss His fulfillment of the Law—which is a separate discussion, but incredibly important. In verse 21 we see the beginning of the six antitheses; Jesus makes six important claims that start with “You have heard… but I say to you.” These teachings address the heart behind certain commands concerning anger/murder, lust/adultery, divorce, oaths, non-retaliation, and loving one’s enemies. This culminates in the call to be perfect as the heavenly Father is perfect.
Now, let’s hone in on divorce. Verse 31–32 (KJV) says: “It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 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.” You may have noticed a change in translation. This is the KJV, often regarded as a historically careful rendering. Why switch translations? Because people claim this verse changes meaning depending on which version you read. I’m here to show that is not the case. To completely eliminate any idea of translational issues, I always go back to the Greek.
The key word here is porneia, which is translated as sexual immorality, fornication, or illicit sexual intercourse. Using that definition, both the modern and KJV renderings accurately capture the meaning. To break it down even further, the relevant Greek phrasing is essentially “except on account of porneia” (parektos logou porneias or similar constructions in the parallel passages). So the English can fairly be rendered “except on the grounds of sexual immorality.”
Now, to the context. Jesus is responding to a common understanding of the law in Deuteronomy 24:1–4, which allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce if he found “some indecency” (ervat davar) in his wife. In Jesus’ day this was debated by two major rabbinic schools:
Hillel (more liberal): almost any reason (even poor cooking or finding another woman
more attractive).
Shammai (more strict): primarily sexual misconduct.
Jesus rejects the “any cause” approach. He places the teaching in the larger context of the Sermon, right after intensifying the adultery commandment to include lust of the heart (vv. 27–30). Divorce is treated as another form of marital unfaithfulness that can harm the other spouse.
The “it has been said” clause refers to the legal procedure of providing a written certificate so the woman could remarry. Jesus does not abolish the certificate itself, but He challenges the underlying assumption that divorce is freely available and morally neutral. In short: divorce is frowned upon. From Adam to Moses, divorce was always seen as a net negative. What we need to look at more closely are the concepts of marriage, unity in one flesh, and why Jews in this period wanted divorces to be “less binding.”
The foundational vision of marriage appears in Genesis 1–2, long before Mosaic legislation. In Genesis 1:27 God creates humanity: “male and female He created them.” Then in Genesis 2 we see the formation of the first man and woman, and Adam’s declaration: “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh.” The narrator continues: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh (basar echad).”
This is far more than physical intimacy (though that plays a major role). It describes a comprehensive, covenantal unity, emotional, spiritual, economic, relational, and physical. It creates a new, permanent family unit. The Hebrew verb for “hold fast / cleave” is dabaq. It carries the sense of being glued or adhering tightly; the same word is used for Israel’s loyal attachment to God. The two people are not intended simply to coexist. They form a single relational entity under God’s design.
Jesus later quotes Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 together in Matthew 19:4–6 and Mark 10:6–9, and adds the climactic declaration: “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” This original pattern is presented as God’s ideal before the entrance of sin. Divorce is therefore not part of the created order; it is a later concession to human hard-heartedness (Matthew 19:8). From Adam forward, Scripture consistently treats the fracturing of this one-flesh bond as a serious rupture—something to be avoided and mourned rather than normalized. Malachi 2:14–16, for example, calls divorce a form of treachery against the covenant partner and notes that God “hates divorce.”
By the time of Jesus, Jewish society operated under the Mosaic permission in Deuteronomy 24:1–4. The phrase “some indecency” (ervat davar) was ambiguous, and the two major Pharisaic schools offered very different interpretations—the House of Shammai (strict) and the House of Hillel (liberal). This operated within a patriarchal legal structure in which only the husband could initiate divorce under traditional Jewish law. The certificate protected the woman by formally freeing her to remarry and often securing the return of her dowry, but it also left her vulnerable if the husband decided to end the marriage for trivial reasons. Marriage involved property, inheritance, and family alliances. An “any cause” divorce gave men greater flexibility to rearrange households—especially in cases of infertility, personality conflict, or desire for a more advantageous match. Think about it this way: if you were a Jewish woman at this time, you would live under the constant pressure that your husband might find a mate with better fertility, family ties, or wealth.
The text states, “Except for fornication / sexual immorality.” This is the key phrasing I want to focus on, and I want to make a few claims very clear before diving in:
Divorce is bad.
Remarriage is bad (in the sense that it is not the ideal and often involves real spiritual risk).
Why do I feel the need to say this? Because in recent debates I’ve noticed a trend: if you defend Jesus’ words “except in the case of sexual immorality,” some people assume you favor divorce and remarriage. That is simply not the case. I am opposed to both as the norm, but I can still read what Jesus actually said without forcing absolute prohibitions where He Himself makes an exception. Agreeing with Jesus here does not mean I favor divorce.
With that said: porneia is a broad term. It covers various forms of sexual sin. The dominant interpretation is that it refers to sexual unfaithfulness that breaks the marital bond. When there is divorce without this exception, it states that the husband “causes her to commit adultery” (or, in some renderings, makes her a victim of adultery). Many interpreters emphasize that the woman is harmed or put in a compromised position; the divorcing husband shares responsibility. Anyone who then marries the unjustly divorced woman also commits adultery, because in God’s sight the original marriage bond remains.
Later, in Matthew 19:3–9, a more extensive conversation between Jesus and the Pharisees, Jesus again points back to Genesis and the original creation of male and female. He makes it clear that Moses permitted divorce because of the hardness of people’s hearts, “but from the beginning it was not so.” This creates the familiar Christian divide. Many Protestants hold that sexual immorality is a legitimate ground for divorce (and, for the innocent party, potentially for remarriage). Many Catholics hold that a valid sacramental marriage is indissoluble; the exception may permit separation from bed and board but not dissolution of the bond or remarriage while the spouse lives.
Jesus does not require divorce. Even if porneia occurs, nowhere does He say one must divorce. Reconciliation remains a real possibility. The overall message across the Gospels is the high value of marriage as a permanent, faithful union that reflects God’s own faithfulness. The teaching sits within a larger call to heart-level righteousness. At the same time, we see Jesus say, more than once, that porneia is an acceptable ground for divorce, the only one He explicitly names.