There are several scriptures in the New Testament in which Jesus Christ seems to indicate that, with only one exception, it is a sin (i.e., adultery) to remarry after divorce.  If this belief is valid, many millions of people are guilty of adultery.  To determine the validity of this belief, we will focus on four scriptures that seem to be the most relevant.

[Note:  When we quote Scripture in this article, we use the wording in the New King James Version of the Bible, except when we are quoting a source that uses a different translation.]

In Matthew 5:32, Jesus Christ declares, “But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.”  Inexplicably, this scripture does not address situations in which a wife divorces her husband because of his sexual immorality.

Except as otherwise indicated, the next three scriptures are similar to Matthew 5:32.

In Matthew 19:9, Jesus Christ asserts, “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”  As with regard to Matthew 5:32, this scripture does not address situations in which a wife divorces her husband because of his sexual immorality.

Likewise, in Luke 16:18, Jesus says, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.”  This scripture, like the previous two, does not address situations in which a wife divorces her husband because of his sexual immorality.  But, unlike the two previous scriptures, no exception is made for sexual immorality by the wife.

And, in Mark 10:11-12, Jesus states, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her.  And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”  Like Luke 16:18, this scripture makes no exception for sexual immorality by the wife.  More significantly, this scripture differs from all three of the previous scriptures in that it specifically mentions that a woman commits adultery if she initiates a divorce from her husband – apparently, for any reason – and subsequently remarries.

Now, we will consider what we regard as several of the best explanations of the four preceding scriptures.  Although each of these explanations is in specific regard to just one of the four scriptures, they are also relevant in explaining the three other scriptures, since the four scriptures are very similar.

David Guzik’s Commentary on the Bible asserts with regard to Matthew 5:32,

Jesus interprets the meaning of the word uncleanness in the Mosaic law – it refers to sexual immorality, not just anything that might displease the husband. Therefore, divorce – and the freedom to remarry without sin – is only permitted in the case of sexual immorality.

  • The ancient Greek word for sexual immorality is porneia. It is a broad word, covering a wide span of sexual impropriety. One may be guilty of porneia without actually having consummated an act of adultery.
  • To this permission for divorce, Paul adds the case of abandonment by an unbelieving spouse (1 Corinthians 7:15).
  • We note that incompatibility, not loving each other anymore, brutality, and misery are not grounds for divorce, though they may be proper grounds for a separation and consequent “celibacy within marriage” as Paul indicates in 1 Corinthians 7:11).

The reason why a person who does not have a legitimate divorce commits adultery upon remarrying is because they are not divorced in the eyes of God. Since their old marriage was never dissolved on Biblical grounds, that marriage is still valid and they are actually guilty of bigamy and adultery.

With regard to Matthew 19:9, Matthew Poole’s English Annotations on the Holy Bible says,

We met with the like determination of our Lord’s upon this question [in] Matthew 5:32, only there it was (instead of committeth adultery) causeth her to commit adultery, that is, in case she married again. . . . Because nothing but adultery dissolves the knot and band of marriage, though they be thus illegally separated, yet according to the law of God, they are still man and wife. Some have upon these words made a question whether it be lawful for the husband or the wife separated for adultery to marry again while each other liveth. As to the party offending, it may be a question; but as to the innocent person offended, it is no question, for the adultery of the person offending hath dissolved the knot of marriage by the Divine law. It is true that the knot cannot be dissolved without the freedom of both persons each from another, but yet it seemeth against reason that both persons should have the like liberty to a second marriage.

But for the innocent person, it is as unreasonable that he or she should be punished for the sin of another. But what our Saviour saith here, and in the other parallel texts, is undoubtedly to be understood of husbands and wives put away not for adultery, but for other light and trivial causes, for which by the law of God no divorce is allowed.

Also, in reference to Matthew 19:9, The Fourfold Gospel by J. W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton states,

The law of divorce will be found at Deuteronomy 24:1-4. Jesus explains that this law was given by Moses on account of the hardness of the people’s heart [sic]. . . . The law permitted the husband to put away the wife when he found “some unseemly thing in her” (Deuteronomy 24:1). But Jesus here limits the right of divorce to cases of unchastity, and if there be a divorce on any other ground, neither the man nor the woman can marry again without committing adultery (Matthew 19:9). Such is Jesus’ modification of the Old Testament law, and in no part of the New Testament is there any relaxation as to the law here set forth. It is implied that divorce for unchastity breaks the marriage bond, and it is therefore held almost universally, both by commentators and moralists, that the innocent party to such a divorce can marry again. Of course the guilty party could not, for no one is allowed by law to reap the benefits of his own wrong.

Thus, Jesus Christ seems to be asserting that remarrying after divorce is adultery, with only one exception, which is mentioned in both Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.  However, there is uncertainty as to what is the precise nature of the exception, because of differences in the interpretation of the Greek word moichao that is translated as “adultery” in some translations and “sexual immorality” in others.  Some Bible commentaries take the position that the Greek word regarding the exception pertains to infidelity after marriage.  Other Bible commentaries indicate that the Greek word may refer not only to infidelity after marriage, but also to sexual relations before marriage with someone other than a person’s future spouse.

We believe that the key factor in understanding the meaning of the four preceding scriptures is not what constitutes the exception.  It is our belief that the key factor is the meaning of the Greek word apoluo which is translated as “divorce” in most of the newer translations of the Bible.  According to Strong’s Concordance, apoluo can mean to set free, to let go (dismiss), or to let go free (release).  In other words, apoluo does not always refer to divorce.

The following excerpts from an article entitled “Divorce and Remarriage” by Stephen Gola provide additional perspective regarding the meaning of apoluo:

When two people are leaving each other there is a “separation.” Apoluo is a separation in general, which does not involve the “legal” aspect of a permanent separation like a divorce. . . . The Greek word apoluo doesn’t have a legal aspect to it. It’s just a common word that means, “I’m going to go” or, “away from, to separate.” Because of our wrong beliefs about divorce, this key word was purposely translated (incorrectly) so it would not conflict with our beliefs.

When used concerning a marriage it means a separation and NOT a divorce. If a spouse separates intending never to return, then the next step comes into play; the spouse obtains a “certificate of divorce.” This is what the confrontation between Jesus and the Pharisees (the religious lawyers of His day) was about in Matthew 19:3-12. The legal question was, “Do you just separate, OR do you separate AND give a certificate of divorce?” The Greek word used for divorce in these Scriptures means, to “send away” or separate from, NOT a finalized legal divorce.

When a husband just leaves his wife for another woman without ever giving her a certificate of divorce, this keeps the wife in limbo. She could not go back to her husband because he doesn’t want her; and she couldn’t “go and become another man’s wife” as Moses commanded because she is not legally divorced (See Deuteronomy 24:1-2). If she did remarry without a legal divorce, she and the man who married her would be committing adultery. This is why Jesus said, “…whoever separates (apoluo) from his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is [just] separated (apoluo) commits adultery” (Matthew 19:9, My Translation.

Because the Pharisees’ hearts were so hard “They said to Him [i.e., Jesus Christ], ‘WHY then did Moses COMMAND to give a certificate of divorce AND to put her away [i.e., separate]?’” (Matthew 19:7). They agreed with the part of the law that said that you could leave your wife, but they didn’t understand that it was not right to keep their wives from getting remarried. A spouse with a hardened heart will not give the other spouse a divorce. They will want to control the person. A person who truly loves unconditionally will always give you a way out: an option not to love.

Jesus said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, PERMITTED you to divorce [i.e., separate from] your wives, but from the beginning IT [i.e., being separated without a divorce] WAS NOT SO” (Matthew 19:8). Notice in verse seven that Moses COMMANDED them to give a certificate of divorce AND to separate (put away) their wives. But in verse eight, because their hearts were so hardened against their spouse, Moses PERMITTED them to just separate without the husband giving the wife a certificate of divorce. The reason Moses commanded that a certificate of divorce be given was to guarantee that the wife could get remarried. Simply, Moses commanded to give a certificate of divorce AND to separate. But because of the hardness of their hearts, Moses permitted them to separate only. The permission to separate and remarry without a divorce was limited to sexual immorality. If the wife was unfaithful, the husband could leave without ever being “officially divorced” — by giving her a certificate of divorcement, and go take another woman as his wife. But if there was no sexual immorality involved, the husband could NOT separate from his wife without getting a divorce first. If he didn’t get a divorce and went to live with another woman or got remarried, they were committing adultery.

Next,  we will consider a scripture that further supports the premise that the Greek word apoluo does not always refer to divorce.  When Joseph learned that Mary was pregnant, he knew that he had not had sexual intercourse with her, so he was trying to decide what he should do.  Matthew 1:19 says, “Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly.”  We know from verse 18 that Joseph and Mary were not married; they were espoused or betrothed (i.e., engaged to be married).  Since they were not married, there was no need for a formal divorce; Joseph could just “put her away” (i.e., employ a separation, not a divorce).

In light of the fact that the Greek word apoluo does not always refer to divorce, we will take another look at Matthew 5:32.  This verse of scripture  immediately follows Jesus Christ’s paraphrasing of Deuteronomy 24:1 in Matthew 5:31.  And, the first several words He spoke in verse 32 were: “But I say to you. . . .”  This indicates that Jesus was about to say something which amplified the scripture in Deuteronomy.  [Note:  The declaration by Jesus in Matthew 5:17 that He had not come to destroy the Old Testament Law, but to fulfill it (i.e., make it complete), suggests that it is reasonable to conclude that He would not contradict what was stated in Deuteronomy 24:1.]

According to most translations of Matthew 5:32, Jesus Christ said that when a man divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality, doing so causes the man’s former wife to commit adultery.  However, this verse of scripture does not make sense unless Jesus actually was referring to situations in which a husband puts his wife away (i.e., separates from her), rather than divorcing her.  Why would a man divorcing his wife cause her to commit adultery if she was not guilty of having been sexually immoral?

It seems much more likely that in Matthew 5:32, Jesus Christ was referring to a man separating from his wife, not to a man divorcing his wife.  Thus, Jesus was saying that if a wife has not been sexually immoral, just separating from her is not sufficient to terminate the relationship, and doing so will cause her to commit adultery.  Therefore, a divorce was necessary to prevent her (and, if she remarried, her future husband) from being guilty of adultery.  On the other hand, if a man’s wife had been sexually immoral, it did not matter insofar as she was concerned if he separated from her or divorced her – she was guilty of adultery.

Essentially the same decision is applicable to all four of the scriptures cited above, which in most translations seem to incorrectly indicate that it is a sin (i.e., adultery) for a person to marry after divorce, unless he (or she) does so because their spouse has been sexually immoral.

Conclusion

The previously-discussed considerations indicate that there is no incontrovertible reason to believe that the Bible teaches that every divorced person who remarries is an adulterer.   And, we do not think that there is valid evidence to support the belief that God recognizes divorces only in cases involving unfaithfulness by one or both spouses.  Instead, we think there is sufficient reason to believe that a person who is legally divorced (i.e., not just separated) is not guilty of adultery if he (or she) remarries.  In other words, there is ample reason to belief that neither divorce nor remarriage after divorce makes a person guilty of adultery.  However, if a person was unfaithful to his (or her) spouse while they were still married, that person is guilty of adultery in that regard.

If a Christian is guilty of adultery, God will forgive that person, provided that he (or she) sincerely confesses their sin in an attitude of contrition and genuinely repents for having committed adultery (see 1 John 1:9).  In contrast, for a non-Christian to be forgiven of adultery – or any other sin – it is necessary for that person to trust in Jesus Christ as their Savior in order to be forgiven.  [Note: To learn what is involved in trusting Jesus Christ as Savior, click on “What Must a Person Do to Be Assured of Eternal Salvation?]