THE EXCEPTIVE CLAUSE
Having established the very clear Bible teaching on this matter of divorce and remarriage, we come now to consider the phrase which seems to present most difficulty to brethren and sisters, and which is quoted more than any other in support of divorce — the so-called "exceptive clause". The phrase... which is quoted more than any other in support of divorceIt occurs in Matthew 5:32Matthew 5:32 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., and again in Matthew 19:9Matthew 19:9 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.. As Matthew 19 contains more detail, and as we have already considered part of the text there, we will deal with it from that chapter.
As we have seen, the rest of Scripture teaches the absolute permanence of the marriage-bond, and so the "exceptive clause", if it allowed for the breaking of the marriage-bond, would deny what the rest of Scripture upholds, and we know that this cannot be so. There were two schools of thought among the Jews on this subject of divorce and remarriage. The school of Shammai allowed divorce only for adultery by the wife. The school of Hillel allowed a man to divorce his wife for all sorts of trivial reasons. Obviously, Jesus would not have countenanced the loose morals of the school of Hillel. Therefore his disciples, the Pharisees, and the vast majority of the Jews, would expect him to take and support the same position as the school of Shammai, and allow a man to divorce his wife for her adultery. Almost certainly the Pharisees were hoping that Jesus would take the stricter view, and so incur the wrath of Herod, (who had married his brother Philip's wife), just as John the Baptist had done earlier.
If Jesus had taken the liberal view he would have astonished everyone, especially his disciples. But if Jesus was taking the same view as the school of Shammai, that divorce was only permissible for adultery by the wife, why were his disciples so astonished as to make the comment, "If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good (R.V. "expedient") to marry" (verse 10). His answer to the Pharisees' question, "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" did not allow for any divorce at all, ONCE A MAN AND WOMAN HAD COME TOGETHER IN MARRIAGE. "Have ye not read, that he which made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall be glued to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore, they are never again two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath yoked together, LET NOT MAN PUT ASUNDER" (verses 4-6).
"Have ye not read?"
Whenever Jesus used the phrase "have ye not read?" it was in an accusative form, suggesting that those addressed should have known the answer to their question from the Scriptures. When God created man and woman, says Jesus, he made them male and female, so that they might be "glued together" by Him in marriage. It is God's doing! And because they are "never again two" it is, of course, quite plain that there are no grounds whatsoever on which to justify divorce. Therefore, what God has glued together "let not man put asunder".