Meaning of Matthew 19:7

This verse records a question posed to Jesus by the Pharisees, designed to trap him into contradicting Mosaic Law regarding divorce. They cite Deuteronomy 24:1-4, which outlines the process for a man to divorce his wife, implying that Moses commanded divorce. Jesus, however, will soon reveal that Moses' provision was a concession to Israel's hardness of heart, not an ideal or a divine command for divorce itself, thereby exposing the Pharisees' flawed reasoning and their focus on legalistic technicalities rather than the underlying divine intent for marriage.

Context and Background

The question arises within Jesus' discourse on marriage and divorce, which began in Matthew 19:3 with the Pharisees testing him. They inquired if it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause. Jesus responded by pointing to the creation account in Genesis, emphasizing God's original design for marriage as a lifelong union between one man and one woman ("a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh," Matthew 19:5, quoting Genesis 2:24). The Pharisees, dissatisfied with this foundational teaching, then brought up Moses' law, specifically the provision in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 that allowed a man to write a "certificate of divorce" and send his wife away if he found "something indecent" in her. They presented this as evidence that divorce was not only permitted but, according to their interpretation, commanded by Moses.

Key Themes and Messages

• The Nature of Mosaic Law: The verse highlights a crucial distinction between divine command and legal provision. The Pharisees interpreted Moses' permission as a command, whereas Jesus understood it as a concession.
• Hardness of Heart: Jesus' subsequent explanation (Matthew 19:8) directly addresses this, stating that Moses permitted divorce "because your hearts were hard," but that "from the beginning it was not so." This reveals that the Mosaic provision was a pastoral accommodation to a sinful reality, not the ideal state of affairs.
• Jesus' Authority: By correcting the Pharisees' understanding of Moses, Jesus demonstrates his superior authority over the Law and his ability to interpret its true intent. He is not abolishing the Law but fulfilling it by restoring its original meaning and purpose.
• The Ideal of Marriage: The question indirectly reinforces Jesus' emphasis on the sanctity and indissolubility of marriage as established at creation.

Spiritual Significance and Application

This passage has profound implications for understanding God's view of marriage and the interpretation of Scripture. It teaches believers to look beyond the letter of the law to its spirit and God's underlying purposes. In application, it calls for a commitment to the covenant of marriage, recognizing that while difficult circumstances may arise, the ideal is faithfulness and perseverance. It also cautions against using legalistic interpretations to justify actions that contradict God's heart for relationships. For those who have experienced divorce, it offers a framework for understanding the complexities within a framework of God's grace and redemptive purposes.

Relation to the Broader Biblical Narrative

This exchange is a pivotal moment in Jesus' ministry, illustrating his reinterpretation of the Old Testament Law in light of his own teaching and the coming Kingdom of God. It aligns with the broader biblical narrative of God's desire to restore humanity to his original, perfect design, which was marred by sin. The creation account sets the standard, the Mosaic Law reflects a fallen humanity's reality, and Jesus' teaching inaugurates a new covenant that calls for a return to God's original intent, empowered by the Holy Spirit.

Analogies

One analogy to understand Moses' concession is like a doctor prescribing strong painkillers for a patient in extreme agony. The painkillers are not the ideal state of health, but they are a necessary provision to manage suffering in a broken body. Similarly, the certificate of divorce was a provision to manage the suffering and complexities arising from a broken commitment in a fallen world, not an endorsement of divorce as the ideal. Another analogy could be a traffic law that permits a controlled detour when a road is impassable. The detour is not the preferred route, but a necessary adaptation to an unavoidable obstacle.

Relation to Other Verses

This verse is deeply connected to:

• Genesis 1:27-28 and Genesis 2:24: Jesus' foundational argument for marriage's indissolubility rests on these creation accounts, emphasizing God's original design for unity and permanence.
• Deuteronomy 24:1-4: This is the specific passage the Pharisees cite. Jesus' response reinterprets its purpose, moving from permission to accommodation.
• Matthew 5:31-32: Here, Jesus directly addresses divorce, stating that divorcing one's wife causes her to commit adultery, unless it is for sexual immorality, and that anyone who divorces her commits adultery. This reinforces his stance on the sanctity of marriage.
• 1 Corinthians 7:10-16: Paul echoes Jesus' teaching on marriage and divorce, also addressing the complexities within the early church, including the principle of a believing spouse not being bound if an unbelieving spouse departs.
• Malachi 2:16: This Old Testament prophet also condemns divorce, stating, "For I hate divorce,' says the LORD, the God of Israel." This further supports the notion that divorce was not God's ideal.