Commentary - Deuteronomy 24:1-4

Bird's-eye view

This passage in Deuteronomy is one of the most significant and debated texts concerning the biblical teaching on divorce. It is crucial to recognize at the outset what this text is and what it is not. It is not, as the Pharisees mistakenly assumed in their conversation with Jesus, the institution of divorce. God is not here establishing divorce as a creational good. Rather, this is case law that regulates and restricts an already existing practice within a hard-hearted and sinful society. The law's primary function is to mitigate the damage caused by sin and to protect the vulnerable, in this case, the woman. It does this by requiring a formal, legal process and, most pointedly, by prohibiting a man from taking his wife back after she has been married to another. This prohibition reveals the gravity of the marital bond and the defiling nature of its dissolution and reconstitution. The law serves as a curb on the casual and cruel whims of men, forcing a measure of solemnity into a tragic situation and thereby upholding the sanctity of the marriage covenant, even in its breach.

In essence, God is accommodating the hardness of human hearts, as Jesus Himself taught, but He is not endorsing it. The statute is a legal guardrail on a dangerous road, not an invitation to go for a drive. The central point is the final prohibition in verse 4. The law establishes that once a woman is joined to a second husband, a new reality is created. The first marriage is definitively over, and to try to resurrect it after an intervening union is an "abomination." This law, therefore, while dealing with the sad reality of divorce, ultimately points to the permanence and exclusivity that God intended for marriage from the beginning.

Outline

Context In Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy 24 is situated within a large block of miscellaneous case laws (chapters 21-25) that apply the principles of the Ten Commandments to the daily life of Israel in the promised land. These laws cover everything from warfare and property rights to family relationships and social justice. This particular statute about divorce follows laws concerning kidnapping, leprosy, and pledges, and it precedes laws about just wages and gleaning. This placement demonstrates that God is concerned with every facet of His people's lives. Marriage and its dissolution are not private matters but have public, covenantal implications that affect the health and holiness of the entire nation. This law is part of a larger fabric of legislation designed to create a just and merciful society that reflects the character of Yahweh. It is a practical application of covenant righteousness in a fallen world.

Key Issues

Regulating Sin, Not Blessing It

When the Pharisees came to Jesus to test Him, they asked if it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all. When Jesus pointed them back to the creation ordinance of one flesh, they played what they thought was their trump card: "Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?" (Matt 19:7). Their error was fundamental. Moses did not command divorce; he regulated it. Jesus corrected them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so" (Matt 19:8).

This is the interpretive key to Deuteronomy 24. This is not God's ideal. This is God, through Moses, setting boundaries for sin. In a fallen world, civil law must often deal with situations that are far from the creational ideal. Think of it like a law that regulates the sale of alcohol. Such a law does not mean the state is commanding or blessing drunkenness. It is acknowledging a reality and seeking to contain its destructive potential. Here, God acknowledges that because of sin, men's hearts will become hard, and they will seek to put away their wives. This law steps in not to approve of the hardness of heart, but to limit its collateral damage. It forces a legal, public process and attaches a severe and permanent consequence to it, thereby discouraging men from treating the covenant of marriage lightly.

Verse by Verse Commentary

1 “If a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house,

The entire passage is a single, long conditional sentence in Hebrew, with the main point arriving in verse 4. This first verse sets up the initial scenario. A man marries a woman, and subsequently finds "some indecency" in her. The Hebrew phrase is ervath dabar, literally "a matter of nakedness." This has been the subject of endless debate. The school of Shammai interpreted it narrowly to mean sexual immorality, while the school of Hillel interpreted it broadly to mean anything that displeased the husband, even burning his dinner. Jesus clearly rejects the lax Hillelite view. The phrase does not refer to adultery, for which the penalty was death (Deut 22:22). It refers to some kind of shameful, improper conduct that falls short of adultery but is serious enough to disrupt the covenantal bond. It was a legitimate "for cause" divorce, which in that culture meant the husband could send her away without a financial penalty, such as the return of her dowry. The law then requires a formal, written document, a "certificate of divorce." This was a crucial protection for the woman. It made the divorce a formal legal act, not a spur-of-the-moment verbal dismissal. It proved her status as a free, unmarried woman, protecting her from accusations of adultery should she remarry.

2 and she goes out of his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife,

This clause continues the scenario. The divorced woman, legally freed by the certificate, is now permitted to remarry. The text states it plainly: "she may go and be another man's wife." This is significant. The law acknowledges the reality and legitimacy of this second marriage. It is not an ongoing state of adultery in a legal sense. A new covenantal reality has been established. She is now the wife of the second man. This is crucial for understanding the prohibition that follows.

3 and if the latter husband turns against her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her to be his wife,

The scenario is now complicated further. The second marriage also ends, either through another divorce (for any reason, here specified simply as the husband "turning against her") or through the death of the second husband. In either case, the woman is once again free and unmarried. The stage is now set for the main point of the entire statute.

4 then her former husband who sent her away is not allowed to take her again to be his wife, since she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before Yahweh, and you shall not bring sin on the land which Yahweh your God gives you as an inheritance.

Here is the punchline. The first husband is permanently barred from remarrying this woman. Why? Because "she has been defiled." This defilement is not moral filth in her character. It is a technical, ceremonial, or legal status. By being joined in a one-flesh union with a second man, her relationship to the first man is permanently and irrevocably altered. To go back to him would be like trying to unscramble an egg. It creates a kind of relational chaos that the law calls an "abomination." This is a strong word, often used for idolatry and severe sexual sins. It describes something that is deeply offensive to God's created order. To treat marriage covenants as interchangeable, to swap partners and then swap back, is to profane the sacred symbol of Christ and the Church. This law prevents a man from divorcing his wife "for cause" (and thus at a profit), letting her be supported by another man for a time, and then taking her back when it becomes convenient. It forces him to recognize that his decision to divorce has permanent, irreversible consequences. In this, the law brings a measure of gravity and finality to the tragedy of divorce, and in so doing, protects the land from the sin of treating marriage as a trivial matter.

Application

While we are not under the Mosaic civil code, the moral principles undergirding this law are timeless. First, it teaches us that God hates the cavalier treatment of the marriage covenant. Divorce is a concession to sin, not a reboot option. The requirement of a legal certificate reminds us that marriage is a public, legal, and covenantal reality, not just a matter of private feelings. Ending it should be a solemn, sober, and legally clear process, not a casual separation.

Second, this passage demolishes the sentimental idea that a first marriage remains somehow mystically intact "in God's eyes" after a subsequent legal divorce and remarriage. This law explicitly forbids returning to the first spouse precisely because the second marriage creates a new, binding reality. To attempt to undo it is an abomination. This has profound pastoral implications for those who have been divorced and remarried, perhaps unbiblically. The answer is not to commit a second sin by divorcing the current spouse in an attempt to fix the first. The path forward is repentance for past sins and faithfulness in the covenant you are in now.

Finally, this law, by showing the mess that sin makes of marriage, should drive us to the gospel. The only reason any of our marriages endure is grace. We are all guilty of "indecency" toward our divine husband, the Lord Jesus. We have been unfaithful in countless ways. And yet, He does not issue us a certificate of divorce. Instead, He took our defilement upon Himself at the cross. He became an "abomination" for us, so that we, His unfaithful bride, could be presented to Himself as holy and without blemish. This hard law in Deuteronomy shows us the ugliness of our sin and points us to the profound beauty of a Savior who remains faithful even when we are not.