The exception clause in Matthew 19:9 is NOT Scripture unless it is genuine. We have four accounts in the New Testament of what Jesus taught on divorce, and all four accounts agree with the single exception of the exception clause in Matthew 19:9 which appears to have been unknown to the early church. The logical conclusion is that it was a later addition to the text taken from Matthew 5:32.
Matt. 5:32. but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
But of course in this verse, the reason for the exception clause is that if one divorces his wife for the reason of unchastity he is not causing her to commit unchastity because she has already done so. And in the last half of the verse we read, “whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”
In Mark 10:11 Jesus taught, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her;
12. and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.”
The language in Luke 16:18 is even stronger, “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.”
As I have already pointed out, on Biblical grounds alone, the exception clause in Matthew 19:9 appears to be spurious. If it is indeed spurious, we would expect it to be unknown to the early Church Fathers and that is what we find. The Bible is, of course, the final authority, but the correct interpretation of the Scriptures is no secret and has been known by at least some Christians throughout the history of the Church. Interpretations of the Scriptures that are not found in any writings for the first 1500 years of the Church cannot reasonable said to be correct, and any interpretations that are totally in conflict with the unanimous view of the Church for 1500 years most certainly cannot reasonable said to be correct. And, of course, interpretations of the Scriptures that are dependent upon modern theology that was unknown until recent times cannot reasonable said to be correct.
There are literally thousands of scribal glosses that do not appear in the text of any English translation of the New Testament today. Many of these scribal glosses were identified by comparing the writings of the church fathers with ancient Greek manuscripts of the New Testament.
I was educated as a scientist, but when I was called by God into the pastoral ministry, I had to go back to school and get a new education. This new education, however, did not cause me to add any new doctrines or drop any doctrines that I had already believed in from the Scriptures alone, but this new education did very much reinforce my belief in the doctrines that I had learned exclusively from very carefully and very prayerfully reading the Bible.
Another scientist, Einstein found he had made the biggest blunder in his life in believing what was not true. He found this out when he peered through Edwin Hubble’s telescope at Mt. Wilson Observatory in California.
I don’t understand your objection to what is said in Matthew 19:9. If all the gospels had the exact same wording, there would be no need of 4. We find illumination in all four, and they certainly do not all contain the same thing. When we decide one verse shouldn’t be included, and then you can bet you will find another you do not agree with, or believe what someone else says. Do we believe His Word, or do we believe the word of man?
Christian faith, ituttut
