Matthew 5:31 · Bible study
Matthew 5:31 Commentary: The Mosaic Divorce Permission
Greek · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Examine why Moses allowed divorce certificates and how Jesus restores marriage's original intent in Matthew 5:31-32.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Jesus cites the Mosaic requirement that a husband give his wife a legal certificate if he divorces her, as recorded in Deuteronomy 24:1.
- Key words: ἀπολύσῃ (apolusē), to release/dismiss; ἀποστάσιον (apostasion), a bill of divorce, a legal document of dismissal.
- Main debate: The grounds for divorce: the school of Shammai restricted it to adultery; Hillel allowed any cause, leading to widespread abuse.
- Theological theme: The tension between God's original creation design for lifelong marriage and the Mosaic concession due to human hardness of heart.
- Best use: Introducing Jesus' radical restoration of marriage in the subsequent verse; showing that the law aimed to limit sin while pointing to a higher righteousness.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
It has also been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’
WEB World English Bible 2000
“It was also said, ‘Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorce,’
KJV King James Version 1769
It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
ASV American Standard Version 1901
It was said also, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`And it was said, That whoever may put away his wife, let him give to her a writing of divorce;
Darby Darby Bible 1890
It has been said too, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a letter of divorce.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And it hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
También fué dicho: Cualquiera que repudiare á su mujer, déle|strong="G1325, G0846" carta de divorcio:
Também foi dito: “Qualquer um que se divorciar sua mulher, dê a ela carta de separação”.
Il a été dit: Que celui qui répudie sa femme lui donne une lettre de divorce.
Es ist auch gesagt: “ Wer sich von seinem Weibe scheidet, der soll ihr geben einen Scheidebrief.”
Er is ook gezegd: Zo wie zijn vrouw verlaten zal, die geve haar een scheidbrief.
Fu detto: Chiunque ripudia sua moglie, le dia l’atto del divorzio.
Zasię rzeczono: Ktobykolwiek opuścił żonę swoją, niech jej da list rozwodny;
Сказано также, что если кто разведется с женою своею, пусть даст ей разводную.
「又 有話說：『人 若休 妻，就當給 她 休書。』
Again, it was said, Whoever puts away his wife has to give her a statement in writing for this purpose:
Verse in Context
Original Language (Koine Greek)
New Testament · Koine Greek · Matthew 5:31
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that this verse cites the Mosaic law on divorce found in Deuteronomy 24:1. Calvin notes that the law did not command divorce but permitted it as a civil concession to human sin. Gill emphasizes the same: the permission was given due to hardness of heart. The certificate itself (ἀποστάσιον, apostasion) was a legal document that freed the wife and allowed her to remarry, which Barnes describes as a check on reckless separation. The Jewish schools of Hillel and Shammai debated the grounds: Shammai restricted it to adultery; Hillel allowed almost any cause, a view that contributed to widespread abuse. Clarke gives examples: Rabbi Akiba permitted divorce if a man saw a prettier woman. Jesus' audience would have heard this citation as a reference to a contentious issue. The consensus is that the verse sets up the problem Jesus will address in the next verse, calling listeners back to God's original design for marriage.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: This verse records a traditional interpretation of the Mosaic law regarding divorce; there is no textual difficulty in understanding the citation itself.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose of the divorce certificate | The certificate was a legal safeguard to protect the wife, allowing her to remarry without accusation of adultery. | Some argue it was primarily to limit frivolous divorce by making it official; others see it as a concession to hard hearts (Matt 19:8) that still fell short of God's ideal. |
| Is the Mosaic law a command or a permission? | Jesus and commentators agree that it was a permission, not a command. | Some Jews (and the Pharisees in Matthew 19:7) treated it as a command; Jesus clarifies it was a concession to human sinfulness. |
| Grounds for divorce | Deuteronomy 24:1 provides the Old Testament basis. | The school of Shammai restricted grounds to adultery; Hillel allowed almost any cause. This contextualizes Jesus' teaching in v.32. |
Historical & Cultural Context
In first-century Judaism, the practice of divorce was shaped by Deuteronomy 24:1. The law allowed a man to divorce his wife if he found 'some unseemly thing' in her. The exact meaning was fiercely debated. The school of Shammai argued this referred to adultery only. The school of Hillel interpreted it broadly, any cause that made her lose favour in his eyes. This laxity had practical consequences. Clarke cites the historian Josephus, who simply put away his wife because he was 'not pleased with her manners.' Gill preserves the full form of the divorce certificate, which included the man's declaration that the wife was free to marry any man.
The Mosaic concession was intended to protect the wife from being left without legal standing. By requiring a written bill, the law ensured that the divorce was official and that the woman could remarry without being accused of adultery. However, as Matthew 19:8 explains, this was a concession for hard hearts, not God's original design. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is bringing marriage back to that original design. The surrounding context (vv.27-30) shows that he addresses the heart, not just the outward action. Divorce, like lust, is a matter of internal faithfulness.
This is the fourth of six antitheses in Matthew 5. The phrase 'It was also said' introduces a contrast with Jesus' own teaching. The law is not abolished but fulfilled. Jesus does not set aside the Old Testament; he reveals its deeper intent, calling for a righteousness that surpasses mere external compliance.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for this verse.
Reception History
This verse has been read across church history as part of Jesus' teaching on the permanence of marriage. Early Jewish-Christian communities saw it as a reaffirmation of God's design. Augustine and other Church Fathers used it to argue against easy divorce. During the Reformation, Calvin and others emphasized that the Mosaic permission was a concession to human sin, not a divine approval. In modern times, this verse is often cited in discussions on divorce and remarriage across evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox traditions. In all traditions, the verse is seen as a corrective to lax interpretations and a call to uphold the sacredness of marriage.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The Old Testament Permission: Divorce was allowed under Moses, but with a certificate to protect the wife (Deut 24:1). This was not a command but a concession.
- The Jewish Misuse: By Jesus' time, the schools of Hillel and Shammai had stretched the permission to allow divorce for almost any reason, ignoring the law's heart.
- Jesus' Restoration: In the next verse (v.32), Jesus calls believers back to the permanence of marriage, except for sexual immorality. He exposes the hardness of heart behind easy divorce.
Five-point outline
- The citation: Jesus quotes the traditional teaching from Deuteronomy.
- The certificate: The bill of divorce was a legal document, not an endorsement of divorce.
- The concession: Moses permitted this because of human sinfulness (Matt 19:8).
- The corruption: The Pharisees and scribes turned a concession into a license.
- The correction: Jesus reaffirms God's original design for one man and one woman for life.
Illustration hooks
- The trivial grounds: Rabbi Akiba allowing divorce if a man saw a prettier woman. This shows how far the interpretation had strayed.
- The legal document: The careful form of the get (divorce bill) shows how the law tried to bring order to a broken situation, but still fell short of the ideal.
- Today's parallels: No-fault divorce culture has made it easy to end marriages for any reason, much like the Hillel school.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Is divorce always a sin? What about when a spouse is abusive or abandons the family?
- Does Jesus' exception for sexual immorality mean remarriage is permitted after divorce for infidelity?
- How do we support marriages in a culture that treats divorce so casually, without judging those who have experienced it?
Leading a Discussion
This verse is part of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, where he calls his followers to a righteousness that exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees. Here he addresses the controversial topic of divorce. The Old Testament permitted it with a certificate; Jesus will go to the heart of the matter. As you discuss, consider how this passage challenges both the casual view of marriage in our culture and the hard-heartedness that can creep into any relationship.
Discussion questions
- What did Moses require when a man divorced his wife, according to this verse?
- Why do you think the law required a certificate? What purpose did it serve in that culture?
- How did the two main schools of Jewish thought (Hillel and Shammai) differ on the grounds for divorce? Which view seems more in line with the original law?
- Jesus says in the verse that follows (v.32) that divorce for any reason except sexual immorality leads to adultery. How does this compare to the views of the Pharisees?
- Why does Jesus bring marriage back to the 'beginning' (cf. Matthew 19:4-6)? What does that tell us about God's design?
- How does this passage challenge the way many people think about divorce today?
- What steps can we take as a community to support marriages and help couples honour their vows?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Deuteronomy 24:1 | When a man takes a wife and marries her, then it shall be, if she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall write her a certificate of divorce, put it in her hand, and send her out of his house. |
| Deuteronomy 24:4 | her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife after she is defiled; for that would be an abomination to Yahweh. You shall not cause the land to sin, which Yahweh your God gives you for an inheritance. |
| Jeremiah 3:1 | “They say, ‘If a man puts away his wife, and she goes from him, and becomes another man’s, should he return to her again?’ Wouldn’t that land be greatly polluted? But you have played the prostitute with many lovers; yet return again to me,” says Yahweh. |
| Matthew 19:3 | Pharisees came to him, testing him and saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason?” |
| Matthew 19:7 | They asked him, “Why then did Moses command us to give her a certificate of divorce and divorce her?” |
| Mark 10:2 | Pharisees came to him testing him, and asked him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” |
| Mark 10:9 | What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
9 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke emphasizes that Jewish leaders had made divorce scandalously easy, allowing a man to dismiss his wife for trivial displeasures or even seeing a more attractive woman. He cites Rabbi Akiba's reasoning and Josephus's casual divorce as evidence that the law's original intent had been widely abused.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes stresses that Moses permitted divorce only as a concession to human hardness, not as God's original design. Christ restored marriage to its first intention, making adultery the sole valid ground for divorce. No civil law can overturn this divine standard: any divorce for another cause, with remarriage, constitutes adultery.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentary points out that divorce in Jesus' day was widely abused because it was granted on the slightest grounds, even a husband's dislike. It cites a Rabbinical saying and notes that actual copies of such divorce bills still exist, similar to the ease of divorce in Muslim countries.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Note highlights that this teaching reduces marriage to a legal transaction: a man could dismiss his wife as long as he provided the required paperwork. The focus falls entirely on outward compliance with divorce regulations rather than on the covenant's original intent.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill points out that Jesus introduces the teaching on divorce differently from the other commandments because it was never a law from God, only a permission granted for Israel's hard-heartedness. The controversy over valid grounds for divorce was a recent dispute between the schools of Hillel and Shammai, not an ancient tradition.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB points out that Jesus moved from the seventh commandment to confront the lax divorce teaching of His day. The law permitted divorce only for marital unfaithfulness, but the Hillel school had stretched this to allow separation on any trivial grounds. Jesus’s teaching directly opposed this permissive interpretation.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange emphasizes that Christ fulfills the law by tracing each commandment back to its inner spiritual root in the heart, exposing the Pharisees' mere external literalism. Jesus refutes their shallow reading with a deeper literalness that reveals the law was always a symbol pointing to inward spiritual realities.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry stresses that the same hand which gave the law is the one now interpreting it, so Christ's expansion is authoritative. The Pharisees confined the commandment against adultery to the outward act, but Jesus exposes the inward lust as already breaking it, proving that sinful desires must be governed just as strictly as sinful deeds.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley highlights that the scribes and Pharisees had twisted the Mosaic divorce law, permitting men to end a marriage on almost any trivial excuse. Their teaching made divorce far too easy, contrary to God's original intention.