Divorce & Remarriage in the Bible: The Permanence of Marriage

Part One

The Words of Jesus

Jesus grounded His teaching on marriage in the creation account, pointing back to God's original design.

The One-Flesh Union (Matthew 19:4-6)

When the Pharisees tested Jesus about divorce, He didn't answer with a new rule. Instead, He pointed back beyond Moses to creation itself:

"Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."

Notice what Jesus is doing here. The Pharisees asked Him about divorce, and He responds by talking about the nature of marriage itself. He says two things worth paying attention to: first, that God is the one who "joins together" a married couple. Marriage isn't just a human arrangement; it's a divine act. Second, He says "let not man separate." If a couple can simply end a marriage through divorce papers, in what sense would Jesus need to warn against separating what God joined? The warning implies that the bond God creates isn't something humans have the authority to dissolve.

The Disciples' Reaction (Matthew 19:10-12)

One of the most telling details in this passage is how the disciples responded. After hearing Jesus' teaching, they said:

"His disciples said to Him, 'If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.'"

Why would they say this? To understand their shock, we need to know the context. In first-century Judaism, two schools debated divorce: Rabbi Hillel allowed divorce for almost any reason, while Rabbi Shammai restricted it to sexual immorality (Mishnah, Gittin 9:10). But here's the key: both schools permitted remarriage after divorce. Remarriage was simply assumed.

So if Jesus was merely saying "you can divorce for adultery and remarry," that would have been Shammai's position, something the disciples were already familiar with. Why would that make them say "it's better not to marry"? Their shocked reaction only makes sense if Jesus was teaching something far more radical: that even when divorce happens, remarriage is not an option.

And notice how Jesus responds. He doesn't correct them or say "you're overreacting":

"But He said to them, 'All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there 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 speaks of those who embrace celibacy "for the kingdom of heaven's sake," acknowledging that yes, some may find themselves in situations where staying single is the path forward.

The Exception Clause (Matthew 19:9)

This is the verse most often cited to justify remarriage after divorce:

"And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery."

At first glance, it seems straightforward: if your spouse commits sexual immorality, you can divorce and remarry. But look more carefully at the sentence structure. The exception clause, "except for sexual immorality," is positioned between two actions: "divorces his wife" and "marries another." Which action does the exception apply to?

Consider an everyday example: "Whoever leaves work early, except for a family emergency, and skips the evening meeting, will be written up." Does the exception for a family emergency also excuse skipping the meeting? Most people would read it as only applying to leaving early. You might leave work for an emergency, but you would still be expected at the meeting.

Two ways to read Matthew 19:9

Reading AThe exception covers both actions

Whoever divorces his wife except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.

After sexual immorality, both divorce and remarriage are permitted.

Reading BThe exception covers divorce onlyThis study

Whoever divorces his wife except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.

Separation is permitted, but remarriage is still adultery, as in Mark 10 and Luke 16.

Action the exception excuses

Phrases follow the word order of the Greek text.

The Grammar Question

In the Greek sentence, the exception clause sits between "divorces his wife" and "marries another," so it can be read as qualifying the divorce alone. Scholars disagree about how much the grammar settles, but this reading has serious defenders. William Heth and Gordon Wenham, for example, argued in Jesus and Divorce (1984) that Matthew permits separation for sexual immorality while the marriage bond remains, so remarriage is still ruled out. (Heth later revised his view; Wenham has continued to defend it.)

In other words: Jesus may be saying you can separate from a spouse who commits sexual immorality, but the bond itself, what God joined, remains intact. This reading is consistent with every other passage in the New Testament on marriage, none of which permits remarriage after divorce.

Public vs. Private Teaching: Two Different Events

Matthew 19 and Mark 10 both record Jesus teaching on divorce and remarriage. Many treat them as parallel accounts, but they capture two distinct moments, and together they clarify rather than contradict each other.

Publicly, the Pharisees came to test Jesus:

"The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?'" (Matthew 19:3, NKJV)

Jesus did answer the Pharisees' question: He pointed to creation (vv. 4-6), then acknowledged an exception for divorce in cases of sexual immorality (v. 9). But His statement, "whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery," could have left the disciples unsure whether the exception applied to divorce alone, to remarriage as well, or to both. As discussed above, that distinction is central to how this passage has been interpreted.

Privately, the disciples asked Him again in the house:

"In the house His disciples also asked Him again about the same matter. So He said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.'" (Mark 10:10-12, NKJV)

When the disciples asked Him again privately, Jesus gave His answer with no exception at all: whoever divorces and remarries commits adultery. Period. Mark's account clarifies what Matthew's left ambiguous: the exception in Matthew permits divorce for sexual immorality, but it does not permit remarriage. The two passages work together: one addresses when divorce may be allowed, the other makes clear that remarriage is not.

Luke 16:17-18

Luke records the same prohibition, and like Mark, gives no exception. But what Jesus says right before is striking:

"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail." (Luke 16:17, NKJV)

The very next thing He says:

"Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery." (Luke 16:18, NKJV)

Even marrying a divorced person is called adultery, because in God's sight, the first marriage still exists. Jesus prefaced this with the permanence of God's law, and yet the prohibition on remarriage after divorce has been one of the most compromised commands throughout church history, as we'll explore later.

The Betrothal View

Another interpretation of the exception clause is that it refers to sexual immorality discovered during the Jewish betrothal period, not adultery within marriage.

In Jewish culture, betrothal was a legally binding pre-marriage phase. If unfaithfulness was discovered during this period, the betrothed man could "divorce" his betrothed. This is what Joseph considered doing when he discovered Mary was pregnant (Matthew 1:18-19).

This explains why Mark and Luke, writing to Gentile audiences unfamiliar with Jewish betrothal customs, omit the exception entirely. It simply wasn't relevant to their readers.

John Piper holds this view; his position paper, listed under Resources, sets out the case in detail.

The Gospels in Historical Order

Most scholars agree that Mark was the first Gospel written. This study follows a chronology that also places Luke before Matthew (the dating is discussed below). Arranged in that order, Jesus' teaching on divorce shows a pattern:

Mark 10:11-12: No exception clause
Luke 16:18: No exception clause
Matthew 19:9: Exception clause present

c. 50–62 AD

Paul's letters

Paul writes 1 Corinthians and Romans, teaching that a spouse is bound while the other lives.

c. 55–65 AD

Mark

Mark 10:11–12: divorce and remarriage are called adultery, with no exception clause.

c. 58–62 AD

Luke

Luke 16:18: the same prohibition, again without an exception clause.

c. 62–67 AD

Paul dies

Tradition places Paul's death under Nero, before Matthew's commonly assigned date.

c. 80–90 AD

Matthew

Matthew includes the exception clause, the focus of the interpretive question.

Why date Matthew later?

A later date for Matthew, commonly c. 80–90, creates a longer interval between Paul's letters and the Gospel containing the exception clause. If that clause introduced a new permission for remarriage, churches relying on the written apostolic material available before Matthew would not encounter that permission in a Gospel for decades. Paul had likely died by then, while Paul, Mark, and Luke preserve the prohibition without it.

Three considerations are often offered for this later dating: Matthew appears to use Mark; Matthew 22:7 is widely read as reflecting Jerusalem's destruction in AD 70; and likely echoes of Matthew in Ignatius of Antioch provide a terminus before the early second century. Together, these considerations commonly lead scholars to place Matthew in the 80s. [Oxford Bibliographies]

This timeline uses early dates for Mark and Luke alongside a later date for Matthew. Gospel dates and order remain estimates, and Matthew's relationship to Luke is debated. The timeline concerns surviving written texts only; early Christians also received apostolic teaching orally. Its point is narrower: the exception clause was not present in Paul's extant letters or in the written accounts of Mark and Luke.

Think about what this means. For a period of time, the early Church possessed only Mark and Luke's accounts, both of which contain absolute prohibitions on remarriage with no exceptions. If Jesus had clearly taught that remarriage was permitted after adultery, wouldn't that be one of the most important things to include? It's hard to explain why both Mark and Luke would leave out such a significant exception if it were part of Jesus' core teaching.

A common interpretive principle is to read less clear passages in light of clearer ones. When five passages (Mark, Luke, Romans 7, 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, 1 Corinthians 7:39) all say the same thing without exception, and one passage (Matthew 19:9) appears to add a qualification, it makes sense to interpret the one in light of the five, not the other way around.

Part Two

Paul's Teaching

If we only had Jesus' words, the permanence view would rest on the Gospels alone. But Paul addresses marriage in multiple letters, and his language is strikingly consistent. Across Romans, 1 Corinthians, and Ephesians, he repeatedly uses the word "bound" to describe marriage and points to one thing that releases the bond: death.

Romans 7:1-4 (NKJV)

"Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man. Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another, to Him who was raised from the dead."

Paul is actually using marriage as an analogy here for our relationship to the Law. But think about it: his analogy only works if his readers already agree that marriage is permanent until death. If divorce could dissolve the bond, the whole analogy falls apart. We'll explore this further below.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 (NKJV)

"Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband. But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife."

This is one of the clearest passages on the topic. Paul says this command comes from the Lord Himself, not Paul's opinion, but Jesus' teaching. And notice the two options he gives if separation happens: remain unmarried, or be reconciled. There is no third option. Remarriage to someone else is not listed. If remarriage were permitted, this would have been the natural place to mention it.

1 Corinthians 7:39 (NKJV)

"A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord."

Paul couldn't be more direct. When does the binding end? When her husband dies. When is she free to marry? When her husband dies. Paul doesn't say "bound until divorce" or "bound unless there's adultery." He says "as long as he lives." This is the same language he uses in Romans 7, consistent and unambiguous.

Ephesians 5:31-32 (NKJV)

"'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church."

Marriage symbolizes Christ's unbreakable covenant with His Church. Just as Christ will never divorce His Bride, marriage reflects this eternal commitment.

What releases the marriage bond?

Marriage "A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives" (1 Corinthians 7:39)

If they separate

Still bound

Remain unmarried Be reconciled

1 Corinthians 7:10–11. No third option is given.

If a spouse dies

Released

Free to marry, "only in the Lord"

1 Corinthians 7:39; Romans 7:2–3

Death Breaks the Covenant, Not Unfaithfulness (Romans 7:1-4)

To understand Paul's reasoning, it helps to read the full passage in Romans 7, where he uses marriage as an analogy for how we were released from the Law of Moses:

"Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband... Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another, to Him who was raised from the dead."

Follow Paul's logic here: He's explaining how we, as believers, were released from the old covenant to enter a new one with Christ. And what released us? Not Israel's unfaithfulness. Israel was unfaithful for centuries, and the covenant remained. What ended the old covenant was death, the death of Christ. We died to the Law "through the body of Christ" so that we could be "married to another."

The Jeremiah 3 Connection

This is exactly what we see in Jeremiah 3. God says He "put her away and gave her a certificate of divorce" because of Israel's adultery (Jer. 3:8). Yet just six verses later, He declares: "I am married to you" (Jer. 3:14). Even after divorcing Israel, God still called Himself married to her. The divorce did not end the covenant. It took the death of Christ to establish the new covenant. The pattern is consistent: unfaithfulness doesn't end a covenant. Death does.

Paul's analogy in Romans 7 depends on this principle. If divorce could dissolve a marriage, then his argument would not work, because there would be another way out of the old covenant besides death. The fact that he builds his teaching on marriage being permanent until death tells us what he believed about marriage itself.

Understanding "Not Enslaved" (1 Corinthians 7:15)

1 Corinthians 7:15 addresses the situation of abandonment by an unbelieving spouse:

"But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace." (ESV)

Many interpret "not enslaved" as permission to remarry. However, a closer look at Paul's word choice reveals something significant.

Paul's Deliberate Word Choice

Paul uses "dedoulōtai" (not enslaved) in verse 15. But when he does permit a widow to marry in verse 39, he uses entirely different language: "bound" (δέω, deo) and "free" (ἐλευθέρα, eleuthera). This appears to be a deliberate avoidance. If Paul meant to permit remarriage in verse 15, why didn't he use the same "bound/free" terminology he uses just 24 verses later?

Paul's two vocabularies for marriage

Compared	1 Corinthians 7:15An unbelieving spouse leaves	1 Corinthians 7:39A husband dies	Romans 7:2–⁠3A husband dies (Paul's illustration of the law)
Paul's words	οὐ δεδούλωταιou dedoulōtai"is not enslaved"	δέδεται … ἐλευθέραdedetai … eleuthera"is bound … is free"	δέδεται … ἐλευθέραdedetai … eleuthera"is bound … is free"
Root words	δουλόω (douloō), "to enslave," from δοῦλος, "slave"	δέω (deō), "to bind," and ἐλεύθερος (eleutheros), "free"	The same: δέω (deō) and ἐλεύθερος (eleutheros)
Picture	Slavery	A binding tie, released by death	Bound by law while the husband lives, released by his death
Free to marry another?	Not mentioned	Yes"free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord"	Yes"no adulteress, though she has married another man" (after his death)

Romans 7:2 also says that when the husband dies, she "is released" (κατήργηται, katērgētai) from the law of her husband.

Notably, Paul never even mentions remarriage in verses 12-16. The context is about whether a believer should initiate divorce when married to an unbeliever. Paul says no, but if the unbeliever leaves, the believer is "not enslaved" to the command against divorce. They are freed from the obligation to prevent the separation, not freed to remarry.

This interpretation aligns with Paul's instruction in verses 10-11: if separation happens, the options are to "remain unmarried or be reconciled." No third option of remarriage to another is given. [A. Andrew Das, Elmhurst University]

Part Three

What About the Old Testament?

Some use the Old Testament to justify divorce and remarriage. But a closer look at these passages tells a different story.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4: Regulation, Not Institution

Deuteronomy 24 addresses divorce practices that existed in ancient Israel:

"When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce... then her former husband who divorced her must not take her back to be his wife after she has been defiled." (NKJV)

Moses wasn't commanding or endorsing divorce. He was regulating a practice that already existed because of hardness of heart. Jesus makes this clear in Matthew 19:8: "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so."

Notably, the passage describes the divorced woman as becoming "defiled" through remarriage. This language suggests it was a concession rather than God's ideal.

In Jeremiah 3:1, God references this Deuteronomy provision but introduces it with "They say," distancing Himself from its authorship. God then asks: "But you have played the harlot with many lovers; yet return to Me." God's standard transcends the Mosaic concession.

Hosea: The Prophetic Symbol of God's Undying Marriage

God commanded Hosea to marry an unfaithful woman as a living picture of His own faithful love:

"Go again, love a woman who is loved by a lover and is committing adultery, just like the love of the Lord for the children of Israel." (Hosea 3:1 NKJV)

Hosea didn't divorce Gomer and marry another. He remained faithful to an unfaithful wife. This is the pattern God sets for His people.

"I will betroth you to Me forever; Yes, I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and justice, in lovingkindness and mercy." (Hosea 2:19 NKJV)

Marriage: A Covenant, Not a Contract (Malachi 2)

The broader passage of Malachi 2:11-16 reveals a deeply significant context. The Amplified Bible Classic Edition (AMPC) makes the situation explicit:

"Judah has profaned the holy sanctuary of the Lord which He loves, and has married the daughter of a foreign god [having divorced his Jewish wife]." (Malachi 2:11, AMPC)

"And this you do with double guilt; you cover the altar of the Lord with tears [shed by your unoffending wives, divorced by you that you might take heathen wives]." (Malachi 2:13, AMPC)

The men of Israel had divorced the wives of their youth to marry foreign women. The altar was covered with the tears of these divorced wives. Yet notice how God still refers to the first wife:

"The Lord was witness [to the covenant made at your marriage] between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously and to whom you were faithless. Yet she is your companion and the wife of your covenant [made by your marriage vows]." (Malachi 2:14, AMPC)

Even after the men had divorced and moved on, God still calls the first wife "your companion and the wife of your covenant." He does not recognize the divorce as dissolving the marriage. In His eyes, the original covenant remains.

"And did not God make [you and your wife] one [flesh]? Did not One make you and preserve your spirit alive? And why [did God make you two] one? Because He sought a godly offspring [from your union]. Therefore take heed to yourselves, and let no one deal treacherously and be faithless to the wife of his youth." (Malachi 2:15, AMPC)

God's purpose for making husband and wife "one" echoes the creation account in Genesis 2:24. And the passage concludes with one of the strongest statements in Scripture against divorce:

"For the Lord, the God of Israel, says: I hate divorce and marital separation and him who covers his garment [his wife] with violence." (Malachi 2:16, AMPC)

Bracketed words are the Amplified Bible's explanatory additions. Translations differ on Malachi 2:16; the ESV reads, "For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence."

In biblical usage, a covenant differs from a contract. Contracts can be broken by either party, but God's covenants with His people are marked by faithfulness and permanence. Marriage reflects this same covenantal character. It is not simply a legal arrangement that a certificate of divorce can undo.

Herod and Herodias

"For Herod himself had sent and laid hold of John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife; for he had married her." (Mark 6:17, NKJV)

Notice the striking language: even though Herodias had divorced Philip and remarried Herod, God's Word still calls her "his brother Philip's wife." The remarriage did not change her identity in God's eyes. She remained Philip's wife. John the Baptist rebuked Herod for this unlawful union (Mark 6:18), expecting him to dissolve it. This powerfully demonstrates that remarriage after divorce does not end the original marriage covenant before God.

Biblical covenants carry serious weight. In 2 Samuel 21:1-14, when Saul broke Israel's covenant with the Gibeonites (originally made in Joshua 9, about 400 years earlier), God sent a three-year famine until restitution was made. Covenants bind regardless of the other party's behavior.

Part Four

Marriage as a Symbol of Christ and the Church

The permanence of marriage reflects the unbreakable covenant between Christ and His Church.

From the Law of Moses to the Law of Christ

Jesus stated that He came not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. In the Sermon on the Mount, He repeatedly said, "You have heard that it was said... but I say to you..." presenting a deeper understanding of God's intentions.

Jesus explained that the Law permitted divorce "because of the hardness of your hearts" (Matthew 19:8), but pointed back to God's original design at creation.

Topic	Old Testament Law	Jesus' Teaching
Murder	"You shall not murder" Exodus 20:13	"Whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment" Matthew 5:21-22
Adultery	"You shall not commit adultery" Exodus 20:14	"Whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart" Matthew 5:27-28
Divorce	Certificate of divorce permitted Deuteronomy 24:1	"Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery" Luke 16:18
Oaths	"You shall not swear falsely" Leviticus 19:12	"Do not swear at all... let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'" Matthew 5:33-37
Retaliation	"Eye for eye, tooth for tooth" Exodus 21:24	"Whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also" Matthew 5:38-39
Love	"Love your neighbor" Leviticus 19:18	"Love your enemies, bless those who curse you" Matthew 5:43-44

In each case, Jesus moves from external behavior to the heart, from minimum requirements to maximum love. His teaching on marriage follows this same pattern: not merely regulating divorce, but restoring God's original design of permanence.

Christ's Unfailing Love

"For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers... shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

Romans 8:38-39 (NKJV). Just as nothing can separate us from Christ's love, marriage is meant to reflect this unbreakable bond.

The Marriage Supper

"Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready."

Revelation 19:7 (NKJV). Human marriage points to the ultimate wedding: the eternal union of Christ and His people.

What God Has Purposed

"For the LORD of hosts has purposed, and who will annul it? His hand is stretched out, and who will turn it back?"

Isaiah 14:27 (NKJV). What God has joined together in marriage, no human action can undo. His purposes stand firm.

Why Does This Matter?

If marriage is meant to be a picture of Christ and the Church, then what does divorce and remarriage say about that picture? Christ promised His Church, "I will never leave you nor forsake you" (Hebrews 13:5). He doesn't abandon His bride when she fails. Marriage is meant to tell that same story.

Part Five

The Early Church Witness

The early Church writers consistently understood that Matthew's exception clause permitted divorce for sexual immorality, but not remarriage. They taught that the marriage bond remained intact until death, making remarriage adultery even when separation was justified. [A. Andrew Das, Elmhurst University]

A historical survey

In Jesus and Divorce, William A. Heth and Gordon J. Wenham report that 25 individual writers and two early councils forbade remarriage after divorce while a former spouse was living. [pp. 37–38]

Eight witnesses, six regions, c. 150–401 AD

c. 150HermasRome
c. 155Justin MartyrRome
c. 177AthenagorasAthens
c. 200Clement of AlexandriaAlexandria
c. 248OrigenCaesarea, Palestine
c. 375Basil the GreatCaesarea, Cappadocia
c. 394JeromeBethlehem
c. 401AugustineHippo, North Africa

"The husband should put her away, and remain by himself. But if he put his wife away and marry another, he also commits adultery."

Hermas

The Shepherd of Hermas, Mandate 4.1, c. 150 AD

"All who, by human law, are twice married, are in the eye of our Master sinners."

Justin Martyr

First Apology, Chapter 15, c. 155 AD

"Whosoever puts away his wife, says He, and marries another, commits adultery; not permitting a man to send her away whose virginity he has brought to an end, nor to marry again."

Athenagoras of Athens

A Plea for the Christians, Chapter 33, c. 177 AD

"Scripture counsels marriage, and allows no release from the union… it regards as fornication the marriage of those separated while the other is alive."

Clement of Alexandria

Stromata 2.23, c. 200 AD

"As a woman is an adulteress, even though she seem to be married to a man, while the former husband is still living, so also the man who seems to marry her who has been put away, does not so much marry her as commit adultery with her."

Origen

Commentary on Matthew 14.24, c. 248 AD

"The woman who has been abandoned by her husband ought, in my judgment, to remain as she is… by calling her adulteress, He excludes her from intercourse with another man."

Basil the Great

Letter 199, Canon 48, c. 375 AD

"A husband may be an adulterer or a sodomite… yet he is still her husband and, so long as he lives, she may not marry another."

Jerome

Letter 55, To Amandus, c. 394 AD

"The compact of marriage is not done away by divorce intervening; so that they continue wedded persons one to another, even after separation; and commit adultery with those with whom they shall be joined."

Augustine

On the Good of Marriage, ch. 7, c. 401 AD

Part Six

Historical Development: From Constantine to the Reformation

For the first three centuries, the Church overwhelmingly taught marriage permanence. After Constantine, the Eastern church gradually accommodated imperial divorce law, and in the sixteenth century Erasmus argued for a similar position in the West.

Understanding this historical development helps explain how different traditions emerged on divorce and remarriage. [See Daniel Jennings' detailed study]

Constantine and the Eastern Church

In 331 AD, Emperor Constantine restricted divorce under Roman law to a short list of serious grounds (Theodosian Code 3.16.1), but divorce and remarriage remained legal. As the Eastern Roman Empire developed, civil law increasingly influenced church practice.

The East-West Divergence

While Augustine and the Western church maintained that the marriage bond could not be dissolved even by adultery, the Eastern church gradually accommodated the imperial divorce laws. By the medieval period, the Eastern Orthodox tradition permitted remarriage after divorce, departing from the earlier patristic consensus.

The two traditions remained divided on this question for the next thousand years.

Erasmus and the Greek New Testament

After the fall of Constantinople in 1453, Byzantine scholars brought Greek manuscripts and learning to Western Europe, fueling a revival of Greek study. Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536) became its most famous New Testament scholar.

Erasmus published the first printed Greek New Testament to reach the public in 1516. In his annotations on 1 Corinthians 7, he argued that divorce with the freedom to remarry should be allowed for adultery and other grave causes, a position closer to Eastern church practice than to the Western tradition of Augustine.

A Scholarly Case for Change

Erasmus's argument had precedent: the Eastern churches had long tolerated remarriage after divorce, while the Western church held to permanence. His annotations gave later reformers a scholarly case to build on.

The Protestant Reformation

Martin Luther and other Protestant reformers, working in the wake of Erasmus's scholarship, took a different position from the historic Western church teaching. Luther rejected the Catholic view of marriage as a sacrament and permitted divorce for adultery, desertion, and other causes.

"As to divorce, it is still a moot question whether it be allowable. For my part I so greatly detest divorce that I should prefer bigamy to it." Martin Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church (1520)

Even Luther expressed this ambivalence. Yet the reformers' acceptance of remarriage after divorce marked a significant break from 1,500 years of Western church teaching.

Timeline: The Historical Development

c. 50-65 AD

The Apostolic Era

Paul instructs the churches to "stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught" (2 Thessalonians 2:15). The early church understood itself to be preserving apostolic teaching on matters of faith and practice.

1st - 4th Century

Early Church Consensus

From Hermas (c. 150 AD) through Justin, Clement, Origen, and Jerome, the Church Fathers overwhelmingly taught that remarriage during a spouse's lifetime is adultery. The one notable exception, the fourth-century writer known as Ambrosiaster, allowed a husband, but not a wife, to remarry after divorcing an adulterous wife. If Jesus and the apostles had taught an exception for remarriage, we would expect wide disagreement among the early writers. Instead, we find remarkable unity across diverse regions and centuries.

Eastern Church

Western Church

331 ADEast

Constantine's Influence

Emperor Constantine restricted divorce to specific grounds, but it remained legal. As the Eastern Roman Empire developed, civil law increasingly influenced church practice, and the Eastern church gradually began accepting remarriage after divorce.

c. 401–420 ADWest

Augustine

Augustine wrote extensively on marriage, teaching that divorce does not dissolve the marriage bond, even after adultery (On the Good of Marriage; On Adulterous Marriages). His teaching became foundational for Western Christianity, which maintained the permanence position.

Medieval periodEast

Remarriage Accepted

By the medieval period, the Eastern Orthodox tradition permitted remarriage after divorce, departing from the earlier patristic consensus.

Medieval periodWest

Permanence Maintained

Following Augustine, the Western church held that the marriage bond could not be dissolved, even by adultery.

1453East

Fall of Constantinople

Byzantine scholars carry Greek manuscripts and learning to Western Europe, fueling the Renaissance study of the Greek New Testament.

c. 1516West

Erasmus and the Greek New Testament

Desiderius Erasmus, editor of the first published Greek New Testament, argued in his annotations for allowing remarriage after divorce, a view closer to Eastern church practice than to Western tradition.

16th CenturyWest

Protestant Reformation

Protestant reformers accepted divorce and remarriage for adultery and desertion, departing from 1,500 years of Western church teaching on marriage permanence.

Modern Era

Divergent Traditions

While many Protestant churches now permit remarriage, others maintain the historic position. The question continues to be studied and debated today.

The arrow marks the flow of Greek learning to the West that made Erasmus's work possible.

Part Seven

Common Questions

The strongest objections to the permanence view, stated as fairly as we can, each with a short response.

Doesn't Matthew 19:9 plainly allow remarriage after adultery?

The objectionRead on its own, the verse can sound that way: "whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery." Many faithful Christians read it as permitting both divorce and remarriage when a spouse has been unfaithful.

A responseThe exception sits beside "divorces," and it can just as naturally excuse the divorce alone (see the diagram in Part One). Mark 10:11–12 and Luke 16:18 give the same saying with no exception, Paul allows only two options after a separation (1 Corinthians 7:10–11), and the early Church read Matthew this way for centuries. One debated clause is best read in harmony with these clear passages.

Didn't the Law of Moses and Jewish practice assume the right to remarry?

The objectionYes. Deuteronomy 24:1–4 anticipates a divorced woman marrying again, and the Jewish certificate of divorce declared, "You are free to marry any man" (Mishnah, Gittin 9:3).

A responseThat is exactly the background Jesus confronted. He called the Mosaic provision a concession to hard hearts and said, "from the beginning it was not so" (Matthew 19:8). Both Hillel and Shammai assumed remarriage, which is why the disciples were stunned by His answer (Matthew 19:10).

Doesn't 1 Corinthians 7:15 free a deserted believer to remarry?

The objectionMany read "not enslaved" as release from the marriage itself, leaving the deserted spouse free to marry again.

A responsePaul does not mention remarriage in verses 12–16, and he uses slavery language (dedoulōtai) rather than the "bound … free" language he uses when a spouse dies (verse 39; Romans 7:2–3). The believer is freed from the duty to prevent the separation, while verses 10–11 still apply: remain unmarried or be reconciled.

What about 1 Corinthians 7:27–28: "If you do marry, you have not sinned"?

The objectionVerse 27 speaks of someone "loosed from a wife," and verse 28 says that if such a person marries, he has not sinned. Some take "loosed" to include the divorced.

A responsePaul introduces this section as concerning virgins (verse 25), and verse 28 continues, "if a virgin marries, she has not sinned." In context, "loosed" most naturally describes the unmarried, not the divorced, whom Paul has already addressed in verses 10–11.

God divorced Israel (Jeremiah 3:8). Doesn't that show divorce can end a marriage?

The objectionGod Himself gave Israel "a certificate of divorce," so divorce seems able to end a covenant.

A responseSix verses later God says, "I am married to you" (Jeremiah 3:14), and He keeps pursuing His people. As Part Two explains, the old covenant gave way through a death, Christ's, not through Israel's unfaithfulness (Romans 7:4).

Isn't it harsh to ask a wronged or abandoned spouse to stay unmarried?

The objectionIt can seem to punish the innocent party for another's sin, and to ask something many people cannot bear.

A responseThe cost is real, and Jesus acknowledged it: "All cannot accept this saying" (Matthew 19:11). He also honored those who remain single for the kingdom (Matthew 19:12). The answer to that cost is not a different standard but a church that carries it together, with friendship, practical help, and a real place in the family of God (Mark 10:29–30).

Something Changed, but It Wasn't Scripture

The Words of Jesus

The One-Flesh Union (Matthew 19:4-6)

The Disciples' Reaction (Matthew 19:10-12)

The Exception Clause (Matthew 19:9)

The Grammar Question

Public vs. Private Teaching: Two Different Events

Luke 16:17-18

The Betrothal View

The Gospels in Historical Order

Paul's letters

Mark

Luke

Paul dies

Matthew

Why date Matthew later?

Paul's Teaching

Romans 7:1-4 (NKJV)

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 (NKJV)

1 Corinthians 7:39 (NKJV)

Ephesians 5:31-32 (NKJV)

Death Breaks the Covenant, Not Unfaithfulness (Romans 7:1-4)

The Jeremiah 3 Connection

Understanding "Not Enslaved" (1 Corinthians 7:15)

Paul's Deliberate Word Choice

What About the Old Testament?

Deuteronomy 24:1-4: Regulation, Not Institution

Hosea: The Prophetic Symbol of God's Undying Marriage

Marriage: A Covenant, Not a Contract (Malachi 2)

Herod and Herodias

Marriage as a Symbol of Christ and the Church

From the Law of Moses to the Law of Christ

Christ's Unfailing Love

The Marriage Supper

What God Has Purposed

Why Does This Matter?

The Early Church Witness

A historical survey

Hermas

Justin Martyr

Athenagoras of Athens

Clement of Alexandria

Origen

Basil the Great

Jerome

Augustine

Historical Development: From Constantine to the Reformation

Constantine and the Eastern Church

The East-West Divergence

Erasmus and the Greek New Testament

A Scholarly Case for Change

The Protestant Reformation

Timeline: The Historical Development

The Apostolic Era

Early Church Consensus

Constantine's Influence

Augustine

Remarriage Accepted

Permanence Maintained

Fall of Constantinople

Erasmus and the Greek New Testament

Protestant Reformation

Divergent Traditions

Common Questions

Contemporary Voices

John Piper

David Pawson

Voddie Baucham

Historic Voices

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

G.K. Chesterton

Denominations Holding to Marriage Permanence

If You Are Divorced or Remarried

If you have been divorced

If you have remarried

If you are in danger

For the church

Resources for Further Study

Books

Videos