What does Deuteronomy 24 teach about divorce?

v.1-4So again in Deuteronomy 24 the question of divorce is treated, where we must say that a certain allowance was made them for the wilfulness of man in this respect. This is no matter of opinion; for our Lord Jesus Christ has ruled in this. Nobody can understand the law aright, or the Scriptures of the Old Testament in general, unless he bear in mind that in it God is dealing with man as such. Consequently, though there is wisdom and goodness and righteousness, it is man in the flesh under trial, and hence it is not yet the perfection of the divine mind displayed. This last is only found when Christ comes. The first Adam is not the Second; and it was with the first man that God was then at work. No part of the law lacks the wisdom of God; but, Christ not being yet revealed, He did not as a fact go beyond man as he then was. To have brought in what was suitable for the Second man could not have applied to Israel in their then condition.

v.1-4And God, it seems to me, has distinctly marked this in Scripture even in an outward fashion, inasmuch as He has not been pleased to give us His word even in the same tongue. The standing witness against the folly of confounding the two Testaments finds its rebuke in the patent fact that the Old Testament is in one language, the New Testament in another. So plain a difference on its very face one might have thought it impossible to overlook; but even believers accept shortsightedness in divine things, and just so far as tradition influences them; for people scarcely think about Scripture, and thus they do not know how to apply the clearest and surest facts, as well as God's words, before all eyes.

v.1-4But there is much more than the use of different languages — there is the difference between the first man fallen into sin and the Second man who first descended into the lower parts of the earth, and then ascended above the heavens after accomplishing the mighty work of redemption. Assuredly this is all the difference possible, and it is just what reigns between the Old and the New Testament, not in the hearts of saints, but as a state of things. Consequently the relationship is altogether of another sort. Hence the provisions that were suitable and appropriate, when God had as an object before Him the first man, could not apply to the Second, under whose revelation and redemption we find ourselves. This must be borne in mind if we would judge rightly about these types, or the law in general which made nothing perfect.

Under law there were cases such as often arise similarly at any time. A man may marry a woman and afterwards be thoroughly dissatisfied with her. This is a warning to every young man and woman today that they take time to be sure that they marry only a partner they have proven trustworthy. For a believer, this partner should be only another believer, and both should be persuaded that it is the Lord's will for them to marry. Both would be thus preserved from the dangers of a breakup and divorce.

However, the sad fact is that a man often finds an excuse for putting away his wife. In such a case in Israel he was required to give her a certificate of divorce, thereby leaving her free to marry another (vs.1-3). but if she did marry another man and he also divorced her, or if he died, then the former husband must not take her back a wife (v.4). This would be most unseemly, for he had before rejected her for what he considered good reason. This is said to be "abomination before the Lord." If there had been no marriage to another, the case would be different. The law is firm and decided about this matter, though when the grace of God is known, it can lead to honest self-judgment on the part of those who are guilty, and can wonderfully overcome the evil by a gracious and righteous recovery. Believers too often put themselves into positions that are so compromising as to be outwardly hopeless; yet we must remember that there is no situation too difficult for the grace of God.

(a) The first commandment here has very plainly the character of a toleration of what could not be yet entirely done away, with a restraint upon it in the meantime, however. And of this the Lord's own words directly assure us. The numerical place seems even to affirm the unity which divorce sets aside; and this agrees with the law itself which treats the divorced woman as in some sense "defiled" by another marriage, and the broken bond in that case as incapable of being renewed.

It is said in Deuteronomy 24:1-4: "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. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. 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, 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."

The commandment in these verses is therefore that a woman who remarried following a divorce from her first husband, could under no circumstances return to him. But the fact that a writing of divorcement is mentioned twice does in no way mean that God commanded divorce or even approved of it. In Matthew 19:8 the Lord Jesus explains to the Pharisees that Moses only allowed them to put away their wives because of their hardness of heart. He adds, "But from the beginning (i.e. according to the creatorial order) it was not so." When the people of Israel received the law at Sinai, the habit of divorce by a writing of divorcement obviously already existed. Moses left it like that, perhaps even for the protection of the wife from a hard-hearted and malicious husband who could cause great harm to her if they continued to live together.

Yet from this allowance in Deuteronomy 24 the Jews had derived a permission for divorce and a commandment for giving a writing of divorcement. We can see this from the Pharisees' question in Matthew 19:7: "Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?" The only disagreement among them was about the reasons for divorce. One school of rabbis taught that "uncleanness" in Deuteronomy 24:1 was adultery or some other form of immoral behaviour, while other rabbis accepted anything a husband did not like about his wife as a reason for divorce. In Matthew 19:3 the Pharisees seem to refer to these disagreements among their teachers, "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"

Matthew 19:1-9 must be studied with the words of Moses on divorce. The Pharisees asked the Lord "why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?" But they erred when they called Moses' word a commandment. It was only something which Moses allowed. Adultery according to the law was punishable with death. "He saith unto them, Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to put away your wives; but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and whosoever marrieth her that is put away doth commit adultery."