Mat 5:31-32, 19:9-10 | Clarke | e4.org | Verse 31. Whosoever shall put away his wife ] The Jewish doctors gave great license in the matter of divorce. Among them, a man might divorce his wife if she displeased him even in the dressing of his victuals! Rabbi Akiba said, "If any man saw a woman handsomer than his own wife, he might put his wife away; because it is said in the law, If she find not favour in his eyes ." . Josephus , the celebrated Jewish historian, in his Life , tells us, with the utmost coolness and indifference, "About this time I put away my wife, who had borne me three children , not being pleased with her manners." These two cases are sufficient to show to what a scandalous and criminal excess this matter was carried among the Jews. However, it was allowed by the school of Shammai , that no man was to put away his wife unless for adultery. The school of Hillel gave much greater license. A writing of divorcement ] The following is the common form of such a writing. See Maimonides and Lightfoot . "On the day of the week A. in the month B. in the year C. from the beginning of the world, according to the common computation in the province of D., I, N. the son of N. by whatever name I am called, of the city E. with entire consent of mind, and without any compulsion, have divorced, dismissed, and expelled thee-thee, I say, M. the daughter of M. by whatever name thou art called, of the city E. who wast heretofore my wife: but now I have dismissed thee-thee, I say, M. the daughter of M. by whatever name thou art called, of the city E. so as to be free, and at thine own disposal, to marry whomsoever thou pleasest, without hinderance from any one, from this day for ever. Thou art therefore free for any man. Let this be thy bill of divorce from me, a writing of separation and expulsion, according to the law of Moses and Israel. REUBEN, son of Jacob, Witness. ELIEZAR, son of Gilead, Witness." God permitted this evil to prevent a greater; and, perhaps, to typify his repudiating the Jews, who were his first spouse.

‏ Matthew 5:31-32

Verse 31. Whosoever shall put away his wife] The Jewish doctors gave great license in the matter of divorce. Among them, a man might divorce his wife if she displeased him even in the dressing of his victuals!

Rabbi Akiba said, "If any man saw a woman handsomer than his own wife, he might put his wife away; because it is said in the law, If she find not favour in his eyes." De 24:1.

Josephus, the celebrated Jewish historian, in his Life, tells us, with the utmost coolness and indifference, "About this time I put away my wife, who had borne me three children, not being pleased with her manners."

These two cases are sufficient to show to what a scandalous and criminal excess this matter was carried among the Jews. However, it was allowed by the school of Shammai, that no man was to put away his wife unless for adultery. The school of Hillel gave much greater license.

A writing of divorcement] The following is the common form of such a writing. See Maimonides and Lightfoot.

"On the day of the week A. in the month B. in the year C. from the beginning of the world, according to the common computation in the province of D., I, N. the son of N. by whatever name I am called, of the city E. with entire consent of mind, and without any compulsion, have divorced, dismissed, and expelled thee-thee, I say, M. the daughter of M. by whatever name thou art called, of the city E. who wast heretofore my wife: but now I have dismissed thee-thee, I say, M. the daughter of M. by whatever name thou art called, of the city E. so as to be free, and at thine own disposal, to marry whomsoever thou pleasest, without hinderance from any one, from this day for ever. Thou art therefore free for any man. Let this be thy bill of divorce from me, a writing of separation and expulsion, according to the law of Moses and Israel.

REUBEN, son of Jacob, Witness.

ELIEZAR, son of Gilead, Witness."

God permitted this evil to prevent a greater; and, perhaps, to typify his repudiating the Jews, who were his first spouse.

Verse 32. Saving for the cause of fornication] λογουπορνειας, 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 λογουπορνειας, 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.

‏ Matthew 19:9-10

Verse 9. Except it be for fornication] See on Mt 5:32. The decision of our Lord must be very unpleasant to these men: the reason why they wished to put away their wives was, that they might take others whom they liked better; but our Lord here declares that they could not be remarried while the divorced person was alive, and that those who did marry, during the life of the divorced, were adulterers; and heavy judgments were, denounced, in their law, against such: and as the question was not settled by the schools of Shammai and Hillel, so as to ground national practice on it therefore they were obliged to abide by the positive declaration of the law, as it was popularly understood, till these eminent schools had proved the word had another meaning. The grand subject of dispute between the two schools, mentioned above, was the word in De 24:1, When a man hath taken a wife-and she find no grace in his sight, because of some UNCLEANNESS, eruath:-this the school of Shammai held to mean whoredom or adultery; but the school of Hillel maintained that it signified any corporeal defect, which rendered the person deformed, or any bad temper which made the husband's life uncomfortable. Any of the latter a good man might bear with; but it appears that Moses permitted the offended husband to put away the wife on these accounts, merely to save her from cruel usage.

In this discourse, our Lord shows that marriage, (except in one case,) is indissoluble, and should be so:-

1st, By Divine institution, Mt 19:4.

2dly, By express commandment, Mt 19:5.

3dly, Because the married couple become one and the same person, Mt 19:6.

4thly, By the example of the first pair, Mt 19:8; and

5thly, Because of the evil consequent on separation, Mt 19:9. The importance of this subject will, I hope, vindicate or excuse, the length of these notes.

Verse 10. If the case of the man] τουανθρωπου, of a husband, so I think the word should be translated here. The Codex Bezae, Armenian, and most of the Itala, have τουανδρος, which, perhaps, more properly signifies a husband, though both words are used in this sense.

Our word husband comes from the Anglo-Saxon, hus and band: the bond of the house, anciently spelt housebond,-so in my old MS. Bible. It is a lamentable case when the husband, instead of being the bond and union of the family, scatters and ruins it by dissipation, riot, and excess.

It is not good to marry.] That is, if a man have not the liberty to put away his wife when she is displeasing to him. God had said, Ge 2:18, It is not good for man to be alone, i.e. unmarried. The disciples seem to say, that if the husband have not the power to divorce his wife when she is displeasing to him, it is not good for him to marry. Here was a flat contradiction to the decision of the Creator. There are difficulties and trials in all states; but let marriage and celibacy be weighed fairly, and I am persuaded the former will be found to have fewer than the latter. However, before we enter into an engagement which nothing but death can dissolve, we had need to act cautiously, carefully consulting the will and word of God. Where an unbridled passion, or a base love of money, lead the way, marriage is sure to be miserable.