31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away(Apoluo) his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement(Apostasion):
32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away(Apoluo) his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced(Apoluo) committeth adultery.
Jesus is explaining two different concepts here. One was the tradition of the heathen to put away their wife, not divorce her but just send her out. She was not free to remarry. She had no support. The heathen, and then the Jews, started doing this over even trivial matters such as if the wife burned their dinner.
Jesus said, Whosover shall put away(Apoluo) his wife -- send her away -- let him give her a writing of divorcement(Apostasion). That's pretty clear. He told them to give her a divorce so she could remarry, but do it in writing.
Then he said that putting away(Apoluo) your wife, except for the cause of fornication --an unlawful union, causes her to commit adultery, as she has not been divorced. She is still married, just sent away. The reason Jesus says this is that infidelity under God's law wasn't something that could be settled by divorce. The one committing adultery was to be put to death by stoning. So what Jesus was saying was that you didn't have to even give a writ of divorcement to someone who committed adultery, as they were to be put to death: Leviticus 20:10.
Then Jesus says that whosoever shall marry her that is divorced -- ((Apoluo) mistranslated wrongly here as the word divorced ( Apostasion), but which is the same Greek word(Apoluo) as put away(Apoluo)). So, Jesus was saying that whosoever shall marry her that is put away(Apoluo) committeth adultery as she didn't have a Bill of Divorcement.
(Put away=a)polu/w transliterated =Apoluo
(Divorcement=a)posta/sion transliterated = Apostasion)
Note: Divorce is a complete break in the marriage contract which is lawful which breaks the bond of marriage, because virtually all marriage contracts involve vows made by two parties. In God's marriage to Israel at Mt. Sinai, Israel (the bride) agreed to submit to His (God's) authority and obey His Laws (Ex. 19:3-8). God, on the other hand, agreed to give them the Kingdom and the blessings of the Birthright. These included honor, protection, sustenance, and children (Gen. 12:1-3).
Israel violated this marriage contract, being incapable of full obedience, and refused to repent. Thus, Israel's Husband (God) divorced her and sent her out of His house. Jeremiah 3:8 says,
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
Note that God not only sent her away (put her away), but He only did so after giving her a written bill of divorce. This was in accordance with the law in Deut. 24:1-4 that I will quote shortly. Hosea 2:2 also shows that God’s divorce meant Israel was no longer God’s wife, saying to her,
2 Plead with your mother [Israel], plead: for she is not my wife, neither am I [God] her husband:
God Himself is a divorcée, using His Own Law to divorce Israel. Therefore, we can safely say that divorce itself is not necessarily a sin. It can be a sin, of course, if the one demanding a divorce does so with evil motives that are not in the Will of God. The fact that God divorced Israel shows that lawful divorce is the result of sin, or violation of the contract. It is the final solution to the problem when all else fails, and when reconciliation is impossible. God's law on divorce and remarriage is given in Deuteronomy 24:1-4
1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
Note: Uncleanness in the Hebrew means: Nakedness. To bare, or to be indecent. (Bare: To be or act shamefully, not being under the cover of her husband. Not having a covering. Lacking a natural, usual, or appropriate covering, i.e.: her husband, 1 Corinthians 11:3. Refusing her husband to be her head). Refusing to submit to her husband as her head. Open to view, laying bare their secrets. To be exposed, or to allow others to view private parts which should only be for her husband -- either physically barring herself, or by exposing private conversation meant only between husband and wife. Indecency, by improper behavior. Figuratively to (disgrace, blemish). To expose herself, by behaving in a way that dishonors her husband. To blemish or to disgrace her husband by using reviling words ( Reviling: To speak about (someone or something) in a very critical or insulting way). A wife who is opposite of: Proverbs 31:10-31.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
Therefore, from verse 1 above, we see immediately that God recognizes there must be a cause of divorcement. It is not specified in any detail, other than finding something unclean in her. Some insist that means divorce is only lawful in case of adultery. However, the penalty for adultery is death—not divorce. Not only that, but note she was married, Lawfully Divorced using God's Law from here first husband, Deuteronomy 24:1, then remarried to a second husband, then Lawfully Divorced yet a second time, Deuteronomy 24:3-4 according to God's Law. God not only allowed divorced, but God's Law allows for multiple divorces.
Others say it means divorce is only lawful if the husband discovers that his wife had had illicit sexual relations with someone else before they were married. However, such a situation also calls for the death penalty, and this is elaborated upon in detail in Deuteronomy 22:13-21. Thus, the grounds for divorce, in the Deuteronomy 24:1-4, must be something else.
The wife, too, could divorce her husband for those same offenses, but in addition to them, she could divorce him for lack of support (i.e., food, clothing, and conjugal relations; compare with Exodus 21:10-11.)
God's Law demands a written document, the "bill of divorcement, also called a writ of divorcement." One could easily imagine a situation where a man divorced his wife verbally, whereupon she remarries-only to have her former spouse fly into a fit of jealous rage stating that this is still legally (lawfully) his wife. He might then deny his verbal divorce and accuse her and her new husband of adultery. Since adultery called for the death penalty, this was a very serious charge.
God's justice is safeguarded by the written Bill of Divorcement, which a divorced wife may produce to prove that her former husband no longer has any claim upon her. It is her security and her license to remarry. This Deuteronomy 24:2 follows on the heels of verse 1, stating that once she has those divorce papers, she is free to remarry. It is common knowledge among Bible scholars that this was how all the rabbis of ancient times interpreted this Divorce Law. There was never any question of the lawfulness of divorce. The only problem was their abuse of the divorce law, and this was what Jesus addressed in Matthew 5, as we will see shortly. Divorce and remarriage was lawful, but if she were to remarry without those divorce papers, she would be committing adultery.
Let's see what the Apostle Paul writes concerning divorce:
1 Corinthians 7:26-28
26 I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be.
Note: The Apostle Paul states that due to the present distress, it would be good that a man was not married, as if he is married his concern would be for his wife and kids, and NOT for God alone. During the present distress, the persecutions by Rome and the Jews against the Christians, not having a wife (and children) would allow a man to be more willing to openly sacrifice himself for the sake of the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth if necessarily. If he was concerned that his wife (and children) would be tortured or murdered if he would NOT deny the Lord Jesus Christ, (which indeed happened to Christians,) he might for his wife (and childrens) sake be tempted to deny the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth in order to save his family.
27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.
Note: Art thou bound (Bound here in the Greek means to tie, to bind, to marry, to be bound to one by marriage under God's Law, Romans 7:2.) unto a wife?
Seek not to be loosed.
Art thou loosed (Loosed in the Greek means: Dissolution, released, a loosing, divorce. A loosing of any bond, as that of marriage by a lawful divorce.) i.e.: divorced from a wife? Seek not a wife.
28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.
"Put away" does not mean "divorce." The term "put away" generally comes from the Hebrew words shalach ("to send away") or garash ("to drive away").
The words differ only in intensity. In reference to a husband and wife, it refers to the act of separation, where a man sends his wife out of the house. The term "divorce" is from the Hebrew word kerithuth. This word refers to the procedure by which the marriage relationship is lawfully terminated. It is used only four times in the Old Testament, and each time it is used in the full phrase, "bill of divorcement," Deuteronomy 24:1-3; Isaiah 50:1; Jeremiah 3:8.
In the New Testament the Greek word for "divorce" is apostasion. Apo means "away from;" stasis means "standing; established (by law)" referring in this case to the written marriage contract. We can see then that the Greek word apostasion signifies more than a mere separation, or "putting away." It is the lawful disestablishment of the marriage contract, accomplished by the written bill of divorcement.
There are those who teach that a true divorce is unlawful in the eyes of God, and therefore what we term "divorce" is realty only a SEPARATION in His eyes. Thus, remarriage would be adultery against the separated spouse. However, as we have seen, the phrase "put away" refers to lawful separation, while the word "divorce" refers to the actual lawful termination of the marriage contract with a written bill of divorcement. The fact that God allows not only a "putting away," but divorce as well shows that it is not a sin to get a divorce, so long as there is just cause to cancel the marriage contract.
God's law states that a bill of divorcement (kerithuth) must always accompany the act of separation, or "putting away" (shalach or garash). Without such a written document, the act of putting away does NOT constitute a lawful divorce in the eyes of God, and she is not free to remarry.
Thus we see that the two terms are not synonymous, although by law they always were to go together. If the two words meant the same thing, it would not have made sense to talk about putting away and divorcing in the same sentence in Deuteronomy 24:1. This may seem like nitpicking, but this point will take on great importance when we attempt to understand Jesus' words in Matthew 5:32.
Did the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth outlaw divorce?
In Mark 10:2-9 the Pharisees asked Jesus if it were lawful to put away one's wife. Jesus asked them in turn what Moses had said. They answered that Moses had commanded them to write a bill of divorcement and to put her away. Jesus then replied, "For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept (law)." Jesus went on to explain that divorce did not follow the perfect order of creation that was set up at the beginning. In other words, divorce is not a good thing, but because men's hearts are hard, it is necessary that provision be made for handling broken marriage contracts. For the same reason, God instituted the death penalty for first-degree murder. From the beginning it was not so, for God created us to live together in harmony. But for the hardness of men's hearts, it became a very necessary judgment to curb such violent crime.
The fact is, ALL LAWS exist only because of the hardness of men's hearts. If all men were perfect, there would be no need for laws, for the laws would be written in our hearts. We would be totally incorruptible. Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Timothy 1:9, "the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient." Thus, so long as there are unrighteous men on the earth, the law must remain in effect, in order that we may have some restraint on men's lusts and wickedness. We conclude, then, that in order to govern men justly in the present state of affairs, God's laws on divorce are absolutely necessary prior to the time that men come fully under the New Covenant and are no longer lawless. Divorce, therefore, should not be necessary among Christians. However, Christians, too, are often lawless and disobedient to the perfect will of God. For this reason divorce provisions are necessary even for Christians.
When a marriage contract has been broken, and especially if one or both parties refuse to repent and restore the lawful order, divorce may well be the only solution. God does not expect the innocent party to honor the contract when the guilty party refuses to do so. The contract is always conditional. Thus, the Lord Jesus Christ's statement, "For the hardness of your heart," should not be construed to mean that divorce itself is a sin. Remember that God Himself is a divorcee, according to Isaiah 50:1; Jeremiah 3:8, yet God did not sin in divorcing Israel.
Nor must we believe that the people twisted God's arm and forced Him to allow divorce. If divorce were a sin, and God allowed it, then God was legalizing sin. This would be a serious accusation for mortals to make, especially in view of the testimony of David in Psalm 19:7 that "The law of the Lord is PERFECT, converting the soul."
Did Jesus outlaw divorce and remarriage after divorce?
Matthew 5:31-32 is by far the most important passage used by most people to prove that remarriage after divorce is adultery. It reads in the ESV translation:
31“It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’
32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
As translated by the ESV version, it would appear that the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth positively condemned divorce and remarriage, thus showing God's Law to be inferior to Divine moral standards. If divorce indeed causes one to commit adultery, then divorce itself would be a sin, according to God's Law of liability. Remarriage, too, would constitute adultery. However, as we will show, neither is a sin.
Let's see how the King James Version, the Authorized Version, of the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Bible defines Matthew 5:31-32,
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
First of all, this passage is a part of His "Sermon on the Mount," which is for the most part a commentary on Bible law. In Matthew 5:17-19 Jesus disclaimed the idea that He was trying to destroy or undermine the law. Further, He positively condemned those who would break the shortest commandment and teach others to do so. Thusly, from this alone, it should be clear that Jesus did not abolish God's laws on divorce and remarriage.
Then in verse 20 Jesus said that our righteousness must EXCEED that of the Scribes and Pharisees. With that in mind, He began to give us examples of Bible law to show how the Jews (Scribes and Pharisees) fell short of the law's righteous standard. The Jews did not keep the true spirit of the law and misinterpreted it in many ways as many have done today commanding that which is right in their own eyes, but not righteous in God's eyes.
1.Thou shalt not kill (vs. 21-26)
2.Thou shalt not commit adultery (vs. 27-32)
3.Thou shalt not bear false witness (vs. 33-37)
4.An eye for an eye (vs. 38-42)
5.Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (vs. 43-48)
In each case the Law in question is introduced with the following format: "It has been said (interpreted in the synagogue). . . but I say unto you. . ." This is not to be construed to mean that the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth is putting away all of these Divine Laws, or that He is replacing each of them with something different or better. It is not the Law the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth is discrediting; it is the Pharisaical interpretation of the Law and a legalistic spirit that He is disagreeing. In other words, the Lord Jesus Christ did NOT put away the Law on murder when He said, "Thou shalt not kill. . . but I say unto you. . . ." Nor did He make it lawful to commit adultery, so long as you don't look upon another woman with lust while you do it.
In a nutshell, then, the purpose of the "Sermon on the Mount" was to improve upon the law's interpretation and application. The true Spirit and meaning of the Law had been lost through the teaching for Doctrines the commandments of men by the "traditions of the elders". Jesus indicted them for this in Matthew 15:7-9.
With that context in mind, and knowing that Jesus did not destroy the Law, let us look at Matthew 5:31-32 in greater detail. These two verses are a part of His comment on "Thou shalt not commit adultery," so the final thrust of His comment is to define adultery in relation to the laws of divorce and remarriage. Matthew 5:31 simply refers to Deuteronomy 24:1, where God demanded that men give their wives a WRITTEN bill of divorcement before they could lawfully put away their wives. Deuteronomy 24:2, of course, allowed divorced wives to remarry after a lawful divorce. So let us take another look at Matthew 5:31-32, inserting a few key words in the original Greek, so that we get a proper translation of the passage.
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away (apoluo) his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement (apostasion):
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away (apoluo) his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced (the word divorced here is the word (apoluo) literally one who is "put away"-- NOT (apostasion) which would mean a bill of divorcement) committeth adultery.
To then paraphrase this: The law says that she commits adultery if she remarries without a written bill of divorcement. BUT I SAY UNTO YOU that whoever puts her away (without divorce papers; that is, unlawfully) causes her to commit adultery (if she remarries under such conditions). Thus, he who simply put her out of his house without divorcing her properly is JUST AS LIABLE AS SHE IS. And whosoever marries her that has been put away (without divorce papers) also commits adultery, because he is marrying another man's wife.
Jesus is here condemning men who put away their wives Babylonian style (verbally), instead of putting them away in the manner prescribed by God's law -- with a written Bill of Divorcement. Under the laws of liability, this would make him guilty of adultery if she were to remarry. So we see that the whole point of this commentary is to bring out a point of law that had not been covered by the Jews- (Scribes and Pharisees) in their interpretations.
What about the phrase, "saving for the cause of fornication?" What does this mean? Most people assume it means that if a wife commits adultery, then it is lawful to divorce her. However, it does NOT say, "except for the cause of ADULTERY." Further, the penalty for adultery was death - not divorce. So what is meant by "fornication?" Why is it alright to put away one's spouse without divorce papers in a case of fornication?
The Meaning of Fornication:
The most common type of fornication is prostitution (Ex. 22:16). This is where a man has sexual relations with an unmarried woman. The solution is either to get married (Ex. 22:16-17) or separate (repent and stop doing it). However, the word also covers other forms of unlawful sexual relations. In Hebrews 12:16 Esau is called a fornicator; yet there is no record in Scripture of his buying the services of a prostitute. However, in Genesis 26:34 does say that he married Hittite wives. From the account in Scripture, this obviously went against God's command not to take a wife from among the Canaanites. Thus, it may be classified as an unlawful marriage or fornication.
We find the term "fornication" used again in 1 Corinthians 5:1. "1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the gentiles, that one should have his father's wife." Thus we see that Apostle Paul uses the term "fornication" to describe another unlawful marriage or sexual relationship that had been forbidden in Leviticus 18, namely, incest.
In Jude 1:7 we read of the people of Sodom and Gomorrha who had given themselves over to "fornication," going after "strange flesh." This, too, is obviously a sexual sin, and yet the only thing we have on record of their sexual tendencies is homosexuality, or "sodomy," Genesis 19:4-8. Each of these examples have one thing in common: they are unlawful sexual relationships, and therefore, there is no LAWFUL marriage contract to bind the two parties together. In other words God does not recognize the "marriage" in the first place. It is void from the start.
Thus, when the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth says it is alright to "put away" (separate without divorce papers) one who civil authorities might considered your spouse in the case of fornication, the reason is quite obvious, as their was NEVER a legal marriage as the “marriage” was unlawful – example, a man “marrying” his daughter. Today, a man marrying a man, or a woman marrying a woman has been “legalized,” by securlar governments. Even though there are Mormon sects that say it is lawful to marry your own daughter, however, according to God's Law it is fornication – unlawful. There was no lawfully-binding marriage contract in the first place, so how can one appeal to the Law of God to have it voided? God requires no such divorce papers for an unlawful relationship. However, if the couple had obtained a marriage license from a humanist government such as those of this world order, then they would have to petition it for a divorce as well, because humanist governments recognize many marriage relationships that God's law does not – homosexual “marriages” – fornication. God does not recognize relationships which are homosexual, incestual, or otherwise forbidden by God's Law as in the case of Esau, even if the parties sign a marriage contract. Another case where divorce papers are unnecessary is in the case of prostitution. Since prostitutes do not enter marriage contracts with a client, the solution is separation (putting away, sending out,) not divorce.
Did the Apostle Paul ban remarriage after divorce?
Since some have been taught that Apostle Paul banned remarriage in 1 Corinthians 7:10-12, we shall study this passage to show that Apostle Paul actually wrote that remarriage is NOT a sin.
10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart (chorizo) from her husband:
11 But and if she depart (chorizo), let her remain unmarried (agamos) or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away (aphiemi, "to dismiss") his wife.
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
At first glance it might appear that the Apostle Paul is speaking of divorce and remarriage. However, the word apostasion (divorcement) does not appear here, since the Apostle Paul is not discussing divorce, but rather the problem of separation, as we see from verse
1 Corinthians 7:1
1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
Thus, the subject of this discussion is whether or not to abstain from sexual relations and marriage itself. Apparently, the Apostle Paul had previously taught them that "it is good for a man not to touch a woman," but the Corinthian church had misinterpreted it to mean that sexual relations prevented Christians from attaining to a truly spiritual life. Thus, the young people were being discouraged from marrying, and some of the married couples were even separating.
So here, the Apostle Paul corrects their error. He had told them that it was good not to marry, it is true, but NOT because marriage itself was a sin or a hindrance to one's personal relationship to God. Rather, it was because of two things: (1) the "present distress" discussed in verse 1 Corinthians 7:26, and (2) to be able to devote more time and energy to spreading the Gospel 1 Corinthians 7:32-35. In those days a man never knew if he were going to be imprisoned or executed and his family with him for following Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. Therefore, because of the dangerous political climate, it may have been a good idea not to marry, if a person could bear the incontinence. It is quite certain that Apostle Paul himself could not have traveled as he did, if he had been married and had had to support a family. Thus, it was an advantage to him and to others like him to remain unmarried so long as they had the gift of continence.
In verse 1 Corinthians 7:5 Apostle Paul makes it clear that it was not right for married couples to separate, or even to abstain from normal sexual relations, except during times of prayer and fasting. (People lose most sexual desire during fasts anyway.) In I Corinthians 7:7-9 he tells unmarried people that if they can take a life of celibacy, they may do so; but if they do NOT have that gift, "it is better to marry than to burn" (with lust).
Regarding the same subject, Apostle Paul then turns his attention to married couples and especially to those couples who had already separated, thinking this was the spiritual thing to do. Apostle Paul's verdict is, "Let not the wife separate (chorizo) from her husband" in verse 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. However, if she does not heed his advice here, Apostle Paul says she must remain agamos or unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband. Most people are taught this means the wife should not divorce her husband, but if she does, she must remain single for the rest of her life, or else come back and remarry her former husband. However, as the context shows, this passage is referring to the problem of separation, rather than to divorce. The Greek word apostasion is not used here. The word translated "unmarried" is agamos, the negative form of gamos. Gamos sometimes refers to the STATE of being married, but it usually refers to the occasion when the marriage contract is put into effect that is, the ACT OF GETTING MARRIED.
Agamos, then, being the negative form of the word gamos, can mean either: (1) the unmarried STATE, or (2) the ACT of not drawing up a marriage contract with someone. 1 Corinthians 7:11 is assumed to mean, "let her remain in the unmarried STATE," however, it is more likely to mean, "Let her not get married to anyone else," since she is only separated from her husband. So, if we were to paraphrase this passage, we would see that Apostle Paul is saying, "let not the wife separate from her husband, thinking that this is pleasing to God. However, if she does separate, she should not get married to anyone else, because she is still under contract with her original husband. Later in this same chapter, Apostle Paul does deal with the question of divorce and remarriage.
Apostle Paul does not use the technical words for divorce and remarriage, but rather the descriptive terms, "bound" and "loosed." To be bound by law means to be married by contract; to be loosed means to be loosed from that contract (i.e., divorced or widowed). 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 reads:
27 Art thou bound (by law) unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed (from the bonds of marriage). Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. 28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.
Few verses are plainer than these. If you are married, do not seek a divorce. If you are divorced or widowed, do not seek a wife (because of the "present distress" mentioned in 1 Corinthians 7:26). But if you do marry, YOU HAVE NOT SINNED; and if a virgin marry, she has not sinned either. In other words, Apostle Paul says, remarriage after a divorce is NOT a sin. Thus, divorce and remarriage is NOT adultery.
Marriage is a conditional contract. I tried to show you that God married Israel at Mt. Sinai and treated Israel as a married wife, until He divorced her (Jeremiah 3:8) for insubordination and disobedience. If marriage were unconditional, then God could not have divorced her without tainting Himself with sin. Therefore, it must have been conditional.
"Put away" is distinct from "divorce" they are two completely different concepts. They are not the same as the world has tried to make them (satan loves this!). I tried to show you how the Law mandates that a man must give his wife divorce papers "Bill of Divorcement" before putting her away. One is the legal act of terminating the marriage; the other is the act of sending her away.
God's Law was not abolished. The Lord Jesus Christ of NazAreth said this in Matthew 5:17-19, and the Apostle Paul said this in Romans 3:31, furthermore, the Apostle John defines sin in terms of violation of God's Law in 1 John 3:4.
1The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
2Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
3There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
4Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
5Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
6His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
7The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
8The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
9The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
10More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
11Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
12Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults.
13Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.
14Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.
Paul (<:) Jesus first!
Page # of 13