Matthew 19:9

Matthew 19:9

7 They said to Him, ^a“Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”

8 He said to them, “Moses, because of the ^ahardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your ^bwives, but from the beginning it was not so.

9 ^aAnd I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for¹ sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

10 His disciples said to Him, ^a“If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.”

Jesus Teaches on Celibacy

11 But He said to them, ^a“All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:

12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and ^athere are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”

Jesus Blesses Little Children

13 ^aThen little children were brought to Him that He might put His hands on them and pray, but the disciples rebuked them.

14 But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for ^aof such is the kingdom of heaven.”

Commentaries:

Robertson's Word Pictures (NT)

<< Matthew 19:8

Matthew 19:10 >>

Except for fornication (parektov logou porneiav). This is the marginal reading in Westcott and Hort which also adds "maketh her an adulteress" (poiei authn moixeuqhnai) and also these words: "and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery" (kai o apolelumenhn gamhsav moixatai). There seems to be a certain amount of assimilation in various manuscripts between this verse and the words in Matthew 5:32. But, whatever reading is accepted here, even the short one in Westcott and Hort (mh epi porneiai, not for fornication), it is plain that Matthew represents Jesus in both places as allowing divorce for fornication as a general term (porneia) which is technically adultery (moixeia from moixaw or moixeuw). Here, as in Matthew 5:31 f., a group of scholars deny the genuineness of the exception given by Matthew alone. McNeile holds that "the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up." That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew's report because it disagrees with one's views on the subject of divorce. He adds: "It cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai." Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew's report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in Matthew 5:31, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one. Certainly Jesus has lifted the whole subject of marriage and divorce to a new level, far beyond the petty contentions of the schools of Hillel and Shammai.

**Other Robertson's Word Pictures (NT) entries containing Matthew 19:9:**

Matthew 5:32
Mark 10:4
Mark 10:11
Luke 16:18
1 Corinthians 7:10
1 Corinthians 7:15
2 Peter 3:16

<< Matthew 19:8

Matthew 19:10 >>

DISCLAIMER: Church of the Great God (CGG) provides these resources to aid the individual in studying the Bible. However, it is up to the individual to "prove all things, and hold fast to that which is good" (I Thessalonians 5:21). The content of these resources does not necessarily reflect the views of CGG. They are provided for information purposes only.