Two views of whether Jesus recognized adultery as the only legitimate grounds for divorce:
Yes, Jesus accepted no basis for divorce except for sexual immorality (porneia in the original Greek). Adultery breaks the
one flesh
marriage bond (Matthew 19:6), so Jesus allows the marriage also in that case to be formally dissolved, and adds that one who marries a woman divorced for any reason other than adultery also commits adultery.No, Jesus confronted their hardness of heart with the will of the Creator at the beginning, but also with his own authoritative command:
I say to you…
(Matthew 19:9a). Jesus stands before the Pharisees as a lawgiver with authority, as greater than Moses, and he authoritatively forbids divorce. The explanation that fits the sentence structure relates to how the certificate of divorce cannot, in terms of the law, apply to cases of adultery. According to the law of Moses, the adulterer was to be killed (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22). However, in Jesus’ day, the requirements to prove adultery were very strict out of fear of shedding innocent blood, so even when adultery had definitely occurred, it was often impossible to prove legally, and the certificate of divorce was used instead of the required judicial penalty. Jewish readers who first read Matthew’s Gospel knew of this improper use of the certificate of divorce, so Matthew carefully kept the exact wording of Jesus’ teaching, which was not needed for the Greek-speaking audiences of the Gospels of Mark and Luke. The Pharisees sought Jesus’ view of Deuteronomy 24:1–22, and his answer speaks strictly about the certificate of divorce as instituted by Moses himself, not the later extension whereby cases of adultery—technically outside the scope of Deuteronomy 24:1–22—were subsumed under the certificate of divorce because the death penalty was no longer carried out. Thus the limited exception mentioned here in Matthew 19:9 relates to the certificate of divorce itself, not to the later Jewish expansion of that practice, explaining why only Matthew records this detail of Jesus’ words. This is also why Christ mentions the exception in the first part of his statement in Matthew 19:8, which refers to the certificate of divorce, and not in the second part in Matthew 19:9, where he expresses his moral judgment of second marriages. The exception’s aim is not to allow second marriages in specific circumstances. The Old Testament treated adultery far more seriously than other matters that might give grounds for divorce. Thus, in Matthew 19:9, Jesus deals not with the avoidance of a command but with a basic issue that needed separate treatment.
Interpretation 1:
Yes, Jesus accepted no legitimate ground for divorce except for sexual immorality (porneia in the original Greek). Whoever divorces his wife for any other reason and marries another commits adultery. Adultery fundamentally breaks the marriage bond constituting one flesh
(Matthew 19:6), and therefore Jesus permits that in such cases it may also be formally dissolved. For the same reason, Jesus further says that the man who marries a divorced woman—that is, a woman divorced for any reason other than adultery—also commits adultery.1
Interpretation 2:
No, Jesus not only confronted their hardness of heart with the language of the Creator at the beginning, but also with his present authoritative command: I say to you…
(Matthew 19:9a). Jesus stands before the Pharisees as a lawgiver with authority, as one greater than Moses, and he authoritatively forbids divorce.
We arrive at a satisfactory explanation—one that also aligns with the sentence structure—when we remember that the certificate of divorce cannot in terms of the law apply to cases of adultery. According to the law of Moses, the adulterer was to be put to death (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22). However, in the Judaism of Jesus’ day, the requirements for proving adultery were extremely strict out of fear of shedding innocent blood. As a result, even when adultery was certain to have occurred, it was often impossible to prove legally. Consequently, the certificate of divorce came to be used in such situations as a substitute for the required judicial penalty.
The Jewish readers who first received Matthew’s Gospel were aware of this improper use of the certificate of divorce. For that reason, Matthew carefully preserves the precise wording of Jesus’ teaching. These nuances would have been unnecessary for the Greek-speaking audiences of the Gospels of Mark and Luke. The Pharisees’ question concerned Jesus’ view of Deuteronomy 24:1–22, and his answer is unequivocal: speaking strictly about the certificate of divorce as instituted by Moses himself, not the later extension whereby cases of adultery—technically outside the scope of Deuteronomy 24:1–22—were subsumed under the certificate of divorce because the death penalty could no longer be carried out. As such, the limited exception mentioned here in Matthew 19:9 pertains to the certificate of divorce itself and not to the later Jewish expansion of that practice. This explains why Matthew alone records this detail of Jesus’ words.
This is also why Christ mentions the exception in the first part of his statement in Matthew 19:8, which refers to the certificate of divorce, and not in the second part in Matthew 19:9—where he expresses his moral judgment concerning second marriages. The purpose of the exception clause is not to offer positive authorization for second marriages in particular circumstances. The Old Testament treated adultery far more seriously than other matters that might give grounds for divorce. Given these considerations it is clear that in Matthew 19:9, Jesus is not dealing with the avoidance of a command but with a fundamental issue that required a separate treatment..2
9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”