Statement of Faith | Tell a Friend about Us | Color Scheme:    
Sunday, November 29, 2020
 

  Study Resources

• Interlinear Bible

• Parallel Bible

• Daily Reading Plan

• Devotionals

• Commentaries

• Concordances

• Dictionaries

• Encyclopedias

• Lexicons

• History

• Sermon Essentials

• Audio Resources

• Religious Artwork

 
  Other Resources

• Advertise with SL

• FREE Resources

• Information

• Set Preferences

• Font Resources

• Contacting SL

 

Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament

Search This Resource
 
 
 
Navigator
PreviousNext
 Verse 8
Chapter 18
Verse 10
Chapter 20

  
 
  Printer friendly version
 
Additional Resources
 
 • Adam Clark Commentary
 • Burton Coffman
 • Barnes' New Testament
 • Darby's Synopsis
 • Gill's Exposition
 • Geneva Study Bible
 • Jamieson, Fausset, Brown
 • Matthew Henry Complete
 • Matthew Henry Concise
 • People's New Testament
 • The Fourfold Gospel
 • Treasury of Scripture
 • Wesley's Explanatory Notes
 
Buy This Resource
 
Hardcover$77.00
 Show me more …
 
Matthew 19:9

Except for fornication (parektov logou porneiav).
This is the marginal reading in Westcott and Hort which also adds "maketh her an adulteress" (poiei authn moixeuthnai) and also these words: "and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery" (kai o apolelumenhn gamhsav moixatai). There seems to be a certain amount of assimilation in various manuscripts between this verse and the words in 5:32. But, whatever reading is accepted here, even the short one in Westcott and Hort (mh epi porneiai, not for fornication), it is plain that Matthew represents Jesus in both places as allowing divorce for fornication as a general term (porneia) which is technically adultery (moixeia from moixaw or moixeuw). Here, as in 5:31f., a group of scholars deny the genuineness of the exception given by Matthew alone. McNeile holds that "the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up." That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew's report because it disagrees with one's views on the subject of divorce. He adds: "It cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai." Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew's report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in 5:31, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one. Certainly Jesus has lifted the whole subject of marriage and divorce to a new level, far beyond the petty contentions of the schools of Hillel and Shammai.

 


Copyright Statement
The Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament. Copyright © Broadman Press 1932,33, Renewal 1960. All rights reserved. Used by permission of Broadman Press (Southern Baptist Sunday School Board)

Bibliography Information
Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on Matthew 19:9". "Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament". <http://classic.studylight.org/com/rwp/view.cgi?book=mt&chapter=019&verse=009>. Broadman Press 1932,33, Renewal 1960.

  HOME    TOP

Dead links, typos, or HTML errors should be sent tocorr@studylight.org
Suggestions about making this resource more useful should be sent tosugg@studylight.org
 

   Powered by LightSpeed Technology

Copyright © 2001-2020, StudyLight.org