When Jesus spoke about divorce and remarriage, he was pushing back against male-privileged interpretations of Deuteronomy 24

In Matthew 19, when Jesus was speaking about divorce and remarriage, he was addressing only the ways that the Jewish religious leaders in his day were misinterpreting Deuteronomy 24:1. He was only pushing back against male-privileged rabbinic interpretations of Deuteronomy 24:1. The Jews who heard Jesus talking to the Pharisees would have known that Jesus was only referring to the rabbis’ twisting of Deuteronomy 24:1 in order to justify divorce for men.

Whenever Jesus spoke about divorce, he was rebuking the interpretations of Deuteronomy 24 which the male religious leaders had invented to advantage themselves. Each of the four times Jesus spoke about divorce, he was focusing on the false doctrines about divorce which male religious leaders had invented.  He wasn’t focusing on the two Mosaic Laws which give dignity and rights to women in marriage and divorce, Exodus 21 and Deuteronomy 21.

• Exodus 21 authorises an abused wife to divorce a hard-hearted husband
• Deuteronomy 21 gives dignity and rights to wives in both marriage and divorce

Clearly Jesus knew those two laws, but he chose not to allude to them specifically. He focused his laser on misogyny of the Jewish rabbis and the callous conduct of men who believed they were entitled to mistreat their wives.

In Deuteronomy 24, Moses does not say that hardness of heart is a legitimate ground for divorce.

Deuteronomy 24 does not specify what is (or is not) a legitimate ground for divorce. In Deuteronomy 24:1-4, Moses did not spell out legitimate grounds for divorce, he only prohibited a particular type of remarriage.

Here is the beginning of verse 1:

When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her… (ESV)

A man who says he found some uncleanness in his wife might be lying, or he might be telling the truth.

In the Hebrew of Deut 24:1, “he has found” is the verb ma.tsa (qal perfective).

That same verb is found in the law about the man who deliberately lies to defame his wife’s good character, where the man says, “I found no tokens of my wife’s virginity!” but when the evidence is brought forth, it is clear he was lying (Deut 22:13-17). In that law, ma.tsa (qal perfective) occurs twice. Everyone knows that man was lying. Why do they find it so hard to consider the possibility that the man in Deuteronomy 24:1 was lying?

Many Christian leaders and commentators have assumed that the man in Deuteronomy 24:1 was telling the truth, and his wife had done something sinful which justly merited divorce. This assumption has led to many false ideas. Here are the some of the false ideas which have come from this assumption. I will strike through each of the false ideas, because I don’t want any of my readers to they are true statements.

• Moses permitted divorce for adultery in Deuteronomy 24
• Jesus agreed with the Shammaites who said that Deuteronomy 24:1 allowed a man to divorce an adulterous wife
• Jesus annulled the Mosaic concession for divorce
• Jesus said adultery is the only ground for divorce, and that trumps everything else the bible says about divorce.

Deuteronomy 24 does not specify what is (or is not) a legitimate ground for divorce. It only sets limitations on the future conduct of men who chose to divorce their wives.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4 forbids a man remarrying the woman he had divorced after she’d been married to another man and that second marriage of hers had come to an end. If you read the passage carefully (though not in the KJV, because it got the syntax wrong) you will see that the law is in verse four, and the preceding three verses simply set out the situation under which the prohibition in verse four take effect.

The Jews who heard Jesus talking to the Pharisees in Matthew 19 (and Mark 10) would have known that Jesus was only addressing how the rabbis were twisting Deuteronomy 24:1 in order to justify divorce for men.

In Matthew 19 and Mark 10, the Pharisees tried to entangle Jesus in a debate about whether a man could divorce his wife for ‘any matter’ — i.e., no-fault divorce for men.

When the disciples heard Jesus admonishing the Pharisees, their first reaction was shock (Matt 19:10). I suggest they were reacting out of their own male privilege. Maybe they later came to understand how Jesus was admonishing the Pharisees, after they’d got over their shock.

When the Pharisees tested Jesus by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any matter?” they were alluding to a dispute between two rabbinic schools: the School of Hillel (Hillelites), and the School of Shammai (Shammaites). 

Both Hillelites and Shammaites assumed the first verse of Deuteronomy chapter 24 was an entitling law which expressly permitted a man to divorce his wife. The only difference between the two schools was this: Hillelites said it allowed a man to divorce his wife for ‘any matter,’ whereas Shammaites said it only allowed a man to divorce his wife for adultery and behaviour inviting adultery.

Many Christians think Jesus admonished the Hillelites and agreed with the Shammaites, but I challenge that notion. I believe Jesus was admonishing BOTH schools of rabbis. Go here to read my argument, but you might want to grab a cuppa first!

For many hundreds of years, the majority of Christians have misunderstood the debate between Jesus and the Pharisees. Like a limpet that clings to a rock, this misunderstanding is very hard to dislodge from Christendom. We need to prise it off the rock and pulverise it like Moses destroyed the golden calf.

Paul did not contradict Jesus, he confirmed what Jesus had said and amplified it. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Paul made it clear that a Christian is at liberty to end a marriage if the other spouse has abused them, deserted them, or been sexually unfaithful.

Male bias

For millennia, men have interpreted Scripture through their own lens. By twisting small elements of Scripture and then magnifying those twists to advantage themselves, they have made virtually everyone think that their legalistic lens is the only lens to see through.

The reason I specify men is because men have been the dominant voices in scriptural interpretation.

Men’s viewpoints have dominated the interpretation of God’s Word for the last few millennia. There are many reasons for this, some of which spring from the biological differences between men and women. Men do not menstruate; men do not have wombs. Men have not had to suffer the pain and difficulty of blood coming from their genitals every month. Men have not had to suckle crying babies from their breasts in the middle of the night. Men have never died in childbirth. (I recognise that countless men have lost their lives in dangerous workplaces and on battlefields — especially when the battles were organised by fools and psychopaths!) Until very recently in human history, men have been the chief bread winners. By the sweat of their brow, men have worked to put food on the table for their families. Since the Fall, men have had advantages (and burdens) that women have not had. But no reasonable person could deny that men’s advantages have a led to men’s viewpoints dominating the interpretation of what scripture says about divorce.

The Pharisees in Jesus’ day interpreted the Old Testament through their male-biased lenses. Christian leaders, most of whom have been privileged men, have interpreted the divorce question through their own biased lenses. There is nothing new under the sun.

The trick is to stop playing their game. Rather than asking why the Bible doesn’t use the exact words “abuse is grounds for divorce,” I recommend identifying and exposing the contradictions in the biased interpretations, and then blowing them away by showing that both the Old and New Testaments allow a mistreated spouse to divorce an abusive spouse, and the mistreated spouse is then free to remarry without incurring guilt.

The mistaken view that “Jesus said adultery is the only ground for divorce” fits very nicely with men’s priorities. The belief that men’s sexual needs get priority has been around ever since the Fall. The idea that the husband owns the wife, the double standard about women’s virginity while men can sow their wild oats, men believing they have the right to mistreat their wives — all are expressions of that belief. The misunderstanding that Jesus said “adultery is the ONLY ground for divorce” has very much suited men.

This post repeats some of what I said in If abuse is grounds for divorce, why didn’t God say so plainly in the Bible?

You may also like to read Isn’t adultery the only grounds for divorce?

For readers who have been wondering why I’ve been pretty inactive on this blog for so long, I have been working through a lot of trauma, old and new. I’m getting EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing) from a mental health professional who is trained in treating trauma. Thanks to her suggestions and professional experience, I’ve had many insights into why my life has been so hard and what I can do to recover and heal from the traumas I’ve suffered.

God is exposing more and more abusers who have been hiding out in the churches. It is encouraging to see this happening, but it can be pretty emotionally intense, especially for those of us whom the predators have preyed on. May we all cling to the Lord, trusting that even when we have no strength, and seemingly no way of escape from the predators, Jesus will carry us and hold us even when we can’t feel Him. May the Lord come quickly! There are two kingdoms. God will win in the end. We may be persecuted and tortured in this fallen world, but this world is coming to an end. When God winds up this world like a scroll, all who love and cling to Jesus will see justice and and enjoy abundant eternal life in the New Heavens and New Earth.

P.S. If you haven’t read The Last Battle by C S Lewis, I encourage you to do so.

Post updated August 2025, October 2025, and November 2025.