In the case of divorce for any other reason the resulting remarriage
The term fornication is discussed at times but usually is related to
adultery. Some miscellaneous information on some possibilities that have
been presented. beastiality: the result was to be death, Lev. 20:16; Ex
22:19; Homosexuality: Death, Lev. 20:13; These were sins of the people
that God destroyed at the hand of Israel as they entered the land, Lev
There is a study of the term "fornication" at the end of this paper.
Basically the term is any sexual activity that is incorrect. In these cases
it refers to adultery.
Some would suggest that the death for adultery was not being practiced
in this time. The method of death was stoning. Stoning was yet present
in Stephen's and Paul's time. John R.W. Stott in "DIVORCE" mentions that
stoning continued until 40 AD.
Matt 14:3-14; Mark 6:14ff (Herod)
John The Baptist had told Herod that it was unlawful for him to have
his brothers wife. Why? It would seem that his brother was still alive
and he along with his wife were breaking the law. What law? The law of
God that states that the man and woman are one flesh until death. Unger
in his Bible Dictionary mentions that the Herod and Herodias eloped while
both were still married.
John The Baptist was confident enough in His God to accuse even the
king, of adultery, yet when a pastor suggests church discipline for the
same thing in this generation, he is held up to ridicule.
Matt 19:3-12 We have here some questions and answers in this text. Question:
v 3 "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" Christ
answers, Haven't you read: Christ refers to the Gen. 2 text.
Question: v 7 Why then did Moses "command to give a writing of divorcement,
and to put her away?" THIS IS A MISREPRESENTATION OF MOSES! Christ corrects
the comment, and tells them that it was because of the hardness of their
hearts that Moses PERMITTED, not commanded it. BUT, This was not so from
the beginning. Would Christ return to the beginning if He thought there
were any basis for divorce or putting away? Not logical.
The term hardness of heart is used normally of unsaved and non believing.
(Pharaoh; Mk. 16:14; 3:5; Rom. 2:5.) This may indicate that divorce is
allowed in the unsaved world due to their unbelief and hardness, though
I'm not sure you can even build that case.
Christ then goes to the thought of adultery for those involved in a
second marriage after a divorce. No man in the text would include a husband.
No man should cause separation!
The reaction of the disciples was of interest. They decided it would
be better not to get married. (Matt 19:10, "His disciples say unto him,
If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry." The
discussion that follows makes it clear that they were talking about not
getting married. Their reaction can only give evidence that they felt marriage
was for life and that there was no way out.
Matthew 19:18 "He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no
murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt
not bear false witness,"
The Lord repeated all of the commandments except the sabbath, thus telling
us they are still valid for today. Clear and concise - no adultery.
So, how can a believer be involved in divorce/remarriage? If they are
they are openly before all that know, breaking one of God's commandments
in an ongoing manner.
Q. How involved can someone in this position be in the local church?
A good question! Today we have men pastoring in this situation. Would we
have an active murderer teaching our youth group? Would we have an active
thief teaching our beginners class? Probably not, so why do we have divorced/remarried
people involved in these ministries?
I once spoke to a man that had recently divorced his first wife. They
had both remarried and all four were singing in the church choir - an evangelical
church - there was constant division because he felt that she and her husband
shouldn't be involved in the choir. WHAT A TESTIMONY FOR CHRIST!
Mark 10:2-12 This is similar to Matt 19, except for one very curious
exception. The exception clause of fornication is not mentioned. Now if
the book of Mark was written for the edification of Gentiles it would seem
that the exception clause would be explained for them, rather than not
mentioned, if indeed there is an exception. Is Mark just applying the thought
that death is the result of fornication and there are no exceptions? It
would seem entirely possible. Christ is asked by the disciples again in
private and Christ states clearly there is adultery in the case of ANY
divorce - remarriage situation.
Some would submit that the reader would assume the exception clause
due to their knowledge of the Matthew text. This is foolishness for the
reader of Mark probably did not have the Matthew text to read. Mark was
writing to specific people. Indeed, since this is true, the exception clause
should have been present, if there was any case for remarriage without
adultery being involved!
Some suggest that his leaving it out was to emphasize the concept of
no divorce that the Scriptures set forth as the best. The fact that Matthew
mentions the exception is because the Lord wanted to be in keeping with
the letter of Deut. 24. Mark just eliminated it to emphasize the importance
of lasting marriages. This to me seems to leave Mark in the position of
being somewhat dishonest with his readers.
Some thoughts: Mark is probably the first Gospel written. He was presenting
the message to a gentile audience that probably would never see Matthew.
If he left out the exception, then he was dishonest and misled the readers.
On the other hand, if he viewed Christ's "exception" as this paper indicates,
as not really an exception but death to the adulterer, then we have Mark
setting forth a proper and complete picture of what Christ said.
This text is even clearer that the divorce/remarriage is a sin based on the breaking of the original marriage. "committeth adultery against her", is clearly stating that his new marriage is against the original spouse - it is adultery against her. Can we ever delegate this to a one time act? I don't know how.
The divorce is not the adultery, nor is the remarriage. It is the divorce/remarriage
that leaves a person in an adulterous relationship.
Can one that is divorced/remarried before salvation receive forgiveness
for their sin when they accept Christ? YES! Does the wrong situation change
because of salvation? NO. Does the first marriage suddenly disappear or
become null and void? NO. Does the adulterous situation disappear or become
null and void? NO.
The use of tenses in this text backs up the thinking presented here
that the adultery is continuing. The verb for putting away is aorist (one
time action), the verb marries is aorist (one time action), and the verb
commits adultery is present (continuing action).
Verse 12 continues on, "And if a woman shall put away her husband, and
be married to another, she committeth adultery." Again the married is aorist
while the committeth adultery is present - continuing.
This use of the present tense would indicate that the Lord and the three
Gospel writers considered the adultery as an ongoing state of affair rather
than a one time act. If this is an ongoing condition then the person that
is divorced/remarried is living in open ongoing sin with no thought of
ceasing from their activity.
Corinthians tells us that open, ongoing, unrepentant sin is cause for
the removal of the person from the assembly. Someone asked me once what
I would suggest for the divorced/remarried person. He asked if I would
recommend divorce. When I said that this would put them closer to the thought
of marriage (one for life) and that it would remove them from sin, he stated
that he thought if was foolish of me to suggest divorce because it was
sin. The man did not think that in God's eyes there is no second marriage,
so there is nothing wrong with going through a secular, legal "divorce."
I would suggest a question in answer to this thought of suggesting a
second divorce. What would we ask a Mormon with four wives to do if we
led him to the Lord? Would we welcome all four wives and the husband into
the membership of the church? No, we would teach them the Bible and pray
that the Holy Spirit would lead them to do the right thing. Missionaries
have faced similar problems on the field over the years and find that the
men with multiple wives normally separate from all wives but the first
and support all wives and children involved.
Luke 16:18 "Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth
adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from [her] husband
Notice that Luke also fails to mention the "exception." He was not writing
to Jews either, so would present the complete picture of no divorce. Matthew
on the other hand was writing to Jews. He would naturally comment to them
from the Jewish background which included the thought of death to the adulterer.
Since their question was based on Moses, Christ had to respond to the Old
Luke 18:20 "Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do
not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and
thy mother." It doesn't sound like the Lord appreciated adultery.
John 8:3 "And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken
in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him,
Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act."
I would like to look at this text for a moment. It might be used as
a proof text to show that the Old Testament death penalty was being set
aside. Not so. Christ told them, that were without sin, to cast the first
stone. None of the men were without the same sin, so none cast a stone.
Since Christ was not a witness to the act, nor was he in the position of
judge, he would not be involved in carrying out the command to stone. The
scribes and Pharisees did not deal with the woman as they should have under
their legal system. They should not have taken her to Christ.
Romans 2:22 "Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost
thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?"
This passage encourages the one that condemns adultery to be sure that
he does not fall into the sin which he condemns. This is a strong admonishment
to the pastors and leaders of our churches. Some leaders are now doing
what they have always condemned.
Romans 13:9 "For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not
kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt
not covet; and if [there be] any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended
in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
Again, definitely in the church age, we have a clear statement of "Thou
shalt not commit adultery...." We Cannot have church leadership, nor even
teachers that are committed to the open breaking of God's clear commandments.
1 Corinthians 7:10, 11 mentions a woman leaving her husband. Some state
this allows her to divorce him. Not so. Divorce is not mentioned - only
leaving. She is told to remain unmarried.
Galatians 5:19 "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are [these];
Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,"
Adultery is mentioned as a work of the flesh. This passage is contrasting
the works of the flesh with the works of the Spirit. It might well be pictured
as the works of the lost contrasted with the life of the saved. The least
we can draw from this text is that the believer should not be involved
in the works of the flesh. If they are in an open manner, how can we allow
them to minister in the church? We should not. Verse twenty mentions, strife
and heresies. These are causes for church discipline and removal from the
assembly, so why would we want someone living in open adultery actively
ministering in our churches?
One might wonder why the church has left its strong stand of removal
of divorced/remarried people from the assembly. The thought that the father
that is in adultery, brings danger to his son in the same area, may well
relate to why the Church today has the same divorce rate that the lost
world has. Because a few divorces were tolerated they became more acceptable,
etc. Some miscellaneous references containing "adultery": James 2:11; 2
Peter 2:14; Revelation 2:22.
Question: When is adultery, adultery? Each intimacy with one not your
spouse is adultery. The life style would also be a life, or living in adultery.
The key is that the adultery is an ongoing thing as long as there are intimate
This is illustrated for us in the spiritual adultery of Israel. They
could have ceased their adultery at any point by leaving their "other gods"
and returning to God. This by the way is also an illustration of the proper
remedy for divorce/remarriage adultery in our own day in the physical realm.
Leave the one that it not your spouse and return to your original spouse.
Question: Is there any sin whereby it is sin for the lost and not for
the saved? Only one that I can think of and that being the rejection of
Christ's finished work. All other sin is universally wrong, incorrect,
and unacceptable to God.
Thus if adultery is deemed sin in any manner wouldn't it seem that it
is sin in all manner? If it is sin for the unsaved, then being saved does
not change it to non sin.
One closing thought concerning divorce/remarriage. Spiritual adultery
is leaving God for other gods. The remedy is leaving the other gods and
returning to God. In marriage adultery is leaving your spouse and going
to other women. The only remedy is to leave the other women and returning
to your spouse.
Conclusions to the study:
1. The most you can say from Scripture is:
a. Divorce for sexual problems was tolerated for Jews because of the
hardness of hearts in the time of Moses.
b. Divorce is not commanded in any circumstance. This leaves the thought
of working it out as the option.
c. The Jews are the only people involved in this idea of divorce, even
if you hold to the possibility of the adultery clause in the Gospels.
d. If you reject the Matthew text being to the Jews then you must do
1.) Accept that divorce in the case of adultery is allowed - NOT COMMANDED
2.) You must prove that the stoning for adultery was set aside before
the time of Christ.
e. You may from I Corinthians 7, envision a separation but not remarriage.
f. Remarriage seems to be out even if you hold to an exception clause
due to the defilement problem of the Old Testament. If you marry a divorcee
then the defilement is transmitted to you as well.
g. The church, and parents are to blame for our divorce problems today
among Christians! We have not been teaching proper ideas of marriage, and
when trouble comes we are not teaching a Biblical concept of divorce and
adultery that follows.
2. Notes of interest:
a. Lev. 21:7; 22:13 show that associating with divorcees does not defile
you. However, beware of their possible negative influence on your own spiritual
life and marriage.
b. A priests daughter can be divorced without bringing change to the
priests status of holiness or position.
We need to apply this to the parents of today. A pastor or layman that
has a divorced daughter need not have his status in the church changed.
The divorce was an adult decision by the daughter and does not affect the
c. Jer. 3:1-8: God put up with generations of adultery with Israel.
This is not permission to people to remarry, but is an illustration of
God's longsuffering. Indeed, it shows that the spouse of a longtime adulterous
partner can have the grace to look toward a reconciliation.
d. If God puts a couple together how can man do anything to tear it
apart? The thought is foolishness. God put it together and there is nothing
short of death that can change that fact.
3. The present tense indicates the adultery is of a continuing nature
and not a one time act at the time of the remarriage. Matt 19:9; Mark 10:11;
Some say these usages are a special use of the present tense which means
that it was a one time adultery. I have asked several Greek scholars if
there was a grammatical basis for saying this, and they said there is not.
4. The idea of the adulterous woman in John 8 is of interest. She was
continuing in sin and was told to go and sin no more. She was forgiven
of the past sin, but told to stop.
5. If the adultery of the divorcee is viewed as a one time sin, then
all succeeding sexual relations are of no consequence. This seems to be
illogical. The person that is married and has activity outside of his marriage
is considered to be in adultery at each occurance. Adultery is an intimate
relation of a married person with a person not their spouse!
6. Some suggest that if a person was divorced and remarried before they
were saved that they are not held accountable for what they did before
they were saved. Let's think about that for a moment. If you murdered before
you were saved are you not still a murderer after you are saved. Are you
not liable for all consequences of the murder before you were saved? Salvation
does not change our marital status nor does it negate the consequences
of past sins.
7. Some ask what the person is to do. They suggest that a second divorce
is wrong. The second divorce would be correcting the sin of the remarriage
and is the only logical answer to the situation.
Indeed, is the second divorce a wrong. There is no second marriage in
God's eyes, so the second divorce would be a legal tool to return to the
situation that God wants them in. One that is divorced and remarried before
salvation has this option open to them and should consider it. Yes, it
would be very difficult! Yes, there would be hardship. But the Scriptures
mention the consequences and hard ship that follows our sins!
The business man that is saved Cannot just break contracts on bad deals
because he becomes a Christian. The alcoholic that is saved is forgiven,
but he has a life long problem facing alcoholism!
8. The problem we have today is twofold.
a. We have divorcees and people that have remarried in our churches!
We must deal with these people as believers that need to be ministered
to. We must attempt to minister to their needs. We do not have to condone
their past actions, nor do we set aside the clear teaching of Scripture
just to use them in the church. Timothy's clear command from Paul was that
the elders were to be one woman type men, and that does not allow for divorcees
b. The second problem is that we still aren't teaching our children
and church people what proper marriage is, nor are we speaking out against
divorce and remarriage.
We must minister the Word and allow people to be confronted with it
even if they don't like it. God has spoken - that is what they will have
9. How do we handle the already divorced and remarried?
a. Do not allow them to condemn themselves. God still loves them! Teach
them the proper principles of marriage/divorce and allow the Holy Spirit
to lead them to the correct conclusion.
b. Help them to understand that any restriction on their usability is
not the leadership's fault but that it is the leaders responsibility from
c. Remember Abraham, David, Solomon and others. bigamy is in the end,
adultery and they were used greatly by God, however they did not have the
indwelling Spirit of God as we do. Their short comings are more understandable.
We will be held to a higher accountability due to our further revelation
and the Holy Spirit's ministry to us.
10. It is a very hard subject for our day. There are multitudes of situations
that are seen by some to be "special" or "different," but the fact remains
that the Scriptures have made some very specific demands of the believer.
It is our responsibility to look at the Scriptures and then in light of
them, view every situation.
11. Divorce is not the best course, nor is it desired, but may be the
legal protection a spouse needs to protect themselves from high bills and
problems. The divorce in this case is only a legal tool and cannot be viewed
as changing the marriage bonds in any way. God has set the standard, not
The most liberal view that has any basis in scripture would be that
divorce and remarriage is okay in view of adultery. Even if you ignored
the above pages of proof against that position and believed it was okay,
then you are still faced with the key thought of God waiting generations
for his people to return from their adultery (That by the way is idolatry
or leaving God for other gods.) and always desiring to have them come back
12. I Cor. 6:9-10 is a verse to consider.
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?
Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor
effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
"Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners,
shall inherit the kingdom of God."
Just how does this relate to our problem? A reading of vv 9-11 will
show that Paul is listing types of unsaved people. He uses this to contrast
the proper living of the believer, or at least the hoped for living of
13. Perhaps some questions and answers would help to put some of this
information into perspective.
Question: What is adultery? Adultery is a married person having relations
with other than their spouse. In our society a single person having relations
with a married person would also be considered in adultery, I would suspect,
however the single person, Biblically, would probably be guilty of fornication.
Question: When is adultery adultery? Every time the sexual relations
Question: Is adultery pre-salvation forgiven after the person is saved?
Question: Is adultery post-salvation forgiven because of the pre-salvation
forgiveness? No. This sin can, and will be forgiven any time the person
uses I John 1:9. Any blanket forgiveness post-salvation is not a Scriptural
Question: How can adultery be considered as a one time act in the remarriage
situation, but not continuing in the case of a man cheating on His wife?
It cannot. Both MUST be the same. Both are ongoing.
Question: Can a continuing sin which stems from a pre-salvation remarriage
be forgiven once for all because of the cross? No.
Question: Does not everything belong under the blood? This question
is of recent consideration. I have not seen, read or heard it until recent
All sins - pre and post salvation - are or can be forgiven, however
on a different basis. Pre-salvation sin is automatic in the acceptance/redemption
process. Post-salvation sin is cared for only as the person seeks forgiveness,
and attempts to rectify their improper action. If post-salvation sin were
automatically cared for then license would be the result in our lives.
Question: Is there any indication that adultery is not sin each time
sexual relations occur? No. Adultery of the mind is a one time act (aorist
tense), yet it can be repeated and would be adultery each time as would
Question: Is there a difference between continuing in the same sin week
after week and being a person that has a different sin each week? Are not
both people the same - in sin?
In God's eyes, yes, sin is sin, however there is a difference and I
believe that God views the two people differently. The one that continues
in the same sin is not changing as the idea of repentance and confession
imply. The person that is in different types of sin is a person that deals
with this weeks sin and puts it behind them. When they find themselves
in another sin they need to deal with it. This person is progressing in
their spiritual life, whereas the other person is continuing in their sin
with no attempt to correct their lives.
Question: If I am in a divorce/remarried situation, what are my alternatives?
1. Abstinence: This should be on the basis of mutual consent according
to I Corinthians 7:5, however this will be a very hard alternative. This
may sound terrible, and it would be a serious strain on the relationship,
however many couples have continued through their life in marriages where
one partner was unable to have sexual relations due to physical limitations.
2. If the remarriage has not yet occurred, then wait until the first
spouse is dead. Many people that have found themselves divorced by their
spouse have remained single until the spouse died.
3. Separation or divorce. This would be the step which corrected the
problem. Again, a very hard alternative.
4. If you find yourself divorced, then do not allow yourself to enter
into friendships that might lead to a desire to get married.
5. Continue in your present situation. This is not a recommendation,
but is a very real solution of many believers around the world. It can
be observed that God continues to use the divorced/remarried person. The
question is, just how much more the Lord could use them if they were not
in this situation.
One item of information that has not been discussed in this paper and
that I have never heard brought into the divorce/remarriage discussion
is the item of vows. The wedding vows are promises that the people make
to one another before man and God. A brief word study in the Old Testament
concerning vows and God's view of them would be good for anyone considering
This paper is not designed to give all the answers to all the questions
that might arise in the readers mind. It is, I trust an honest look at
the Scripture as it relates to the topic.
To reject the conclusions of this paper cannot be a simple mental rejection
of the conclusions. To reject you must find different conclusions based
on the texts given. You must not fall into the temptation to spiritualize
or allegorize. We believe in literal, plain, easy interpretation of Scripture
and must practice it in ALL studies we do in the Word.
You must deal with the present tense verbs that the Gospel writers use.
You must deal with the Malachi passage that tells us that God hates divorce
and treachery. You must deal with the teaching of the Lord concerning the
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION ON RELATED WORDS:
The Greek word "moichos" is the noun form of the word. It means according
to Vine, "...denotes one who has unlawful intercourse with the spouse of
another...." "moichalis" is the term for the woman, "an adulteress" according
to Vine. ("moicheia" is the adjective form, "moichao" and "moicheuo" are
the verb forms.) See complete word study in divorce/remarriage file.
We need to consider for a moment the thought of fornication in the Gospels.
Most, I have read and heard consider this to be adultery within the marriage.
The Greek words are as follows: Noun forms, "porneia" and "pornos", Verb
forms, "porneuo" and "ekporneuo."
Vine on the word:
"pornia": "...of illicit sexual intercourse...." It is also used metaphorically
of idolatry. Vine mentions that it includes adultery but can be distinguished
from adultery. (Matt 15:19)
"pornos": "...denotes a man who indulges in fornication, a fornicator...."
"poneuo": "...to commit fornication...."
"ekporneuo": "...a strengthened form of No. I...to give oneself up to
fornication, implying excessive indulgence...."
So fornication can be adultery, but may be other things as well.
Matt 15:19 states, "For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders,
adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemeies:" The text
goes on to state "These are the things which defile a man...." Not an activity
that a believer ought to be involved in once, much less on an ongoing basis.
Adultery in the Matthew text is the Greek word "moicheia."
Fornication in the Matthew text is the Greek word "porneia."
References that contain the term with some comments: 2 Chronicles 21:11; Isaiah 23:17; Ezekiel 16:29; Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9; John 8:41; Acts 15:20; Acts 15:29; Acts 21:25; Romans 1:29; Rom. 7:2-3 This is an illustration of the persons relation to the law. Under the law, it has dominion over you for life. Thus in marriage the vow has dominion over you all your life. Paul's clear statement is that the person that remarries while the spouse lives is an adulterer! His other clear statement is that death breaks that bond and that the person is free to remarry. In essence, because Christ died and fulfilled the law we are free to take Christ since the old bonds and dominion of the law are broken; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 1 Corinthians 6:13; 1 Corinthians 6:18; 1 Corinthians 7:2; I Cor. 7:10ff This is a series of orders. vs 10 the wife shouldn't leave husband/vs 11 the wife if leaves remains unmarried or reconciles/the husband is not to send her away/vs 15 if there is an unbelieving mate that leaves then let them go but live in peace. They are free from the need to keep the marriage together. Ezra 10 may relate to this. vs 39 the wife is bound to the husband as long as he is alive/free to marry when he dies --"IN THE LORD"! HOWEVER, Paul mentions she may be happier alone and not remarried. It is of interest that this may have been written before Matt. If this is true then was Paul not very remiss in not mentioning the exception clause if indeed it exists? The term bondage is never used in relation to divorce in the New Testament. Remarriage in the case of abandonment is not found in this text. The text is clear that marriage is for life; 1 Corinthians 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Eph. 5:21-33 The marriage relationship is used to illustrate the relationship of Christ to the church. If the marriage bond is separable then the bond between Christ the head and the church His body is also separable and this is unacceptable. Both bonds are permanent; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 1:7; Revelation 2:14; Revelation 2:20; Revelation 9:21; Revelation 14:8; Revelation 17:2; Revelation 17:4; Revelation 18:3; Revelation 18:9; Revelation 19:2.
The term is not well defined by the passages. The fact that it is used
allegorically of nations or kings fornicating with the great whore could
lead us to believe that it is illicit relations, but whether it is among
singles, or among a married and an unknown, is not clear.
It would seem easiest to understand the word to refer to literally,
any improper sexual activity, and allegorically any improper relationship
with those you should not be having relationships with.
Since the Gospel texts are in the context of married partners and new
married partners, it would seem that fornication is adultery. Adultery
would cover any improper activity outside of the marriage, which also fits
into the definition and usage of fornication.
Two other Greek words that need to be mentioned:
Both of these terms are related to divorce. "apoluo" which is a term
used in secular Greek for dismissal from the army, or from jail. It also
is used of setting a debtor free. (From Wayne A. Detzler's book, "NEW TESTAMENT
WORDS IN TODAY'S LANGUAGE"; Wheaton: Victor Books, 1986, p 124.) This is
the term translated "put away" in the Gospels.
"apostasion" which is used of the bill of divorcement. The Septuigent
writers used this tern to translate the word in Deut 24:3. This is used
in Matt 5:31; 19:7; Mark 10:4. This is also the term the Septuigent writers
used in Jer. 3:8 for bill of divorcement.