Texts Notes Verse List Exact Search
Results 1 - 20 of 41 for divorces (0.000 seconds)
Jump to page: 1 2 3 Next
  Discovery Box
(1.00) (Mat 5:31)

tn Or “a written notice of divorce.”

(1.00) (Deu 24:3)

tn Heb “writes her a document of divorce.”

(0.71) (Deu 24:4)

sn The issue here is not divorce and its grounds per se but prohibition of remarriage to a mate whom one has previously divorced.

(0.67) (Mar 10:4)

tn Grk “to divorce.” The pronoun has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

(0.58) (Lev 21:7)

tn The pronoun “he” in this clause refers to the priest, not the former husband of the divorced woman.

(0.58) (Mal 2:16)

sn Though the statement “I hate divorce” may (and should) be understood as a comprehensive biblical principle, the immediate context suggests that the divorce in view is that of one Jewish person by another in order to undertake subsequent marriages. The injunction here by no means contradicts Ezra’s commands to Jewish men to divorce their heathen wives (Ezra 9-10).

(0.56) (Deu 21:14)

sn Heb “send her off.” The Hebrew term שִׁלַּחְתָּה (shillakhtah) is a somewhat euphemistic way of referring to divorce, the matter clearly in view here (cf. Deut 22:19, 29; 24:1, 3; Jer 3:1; Mal 2:16). This passage does not have the matter of divorce as its principal objective, so it should not be understood as endorsing divorce generally. It merely makes the point that if grounds for divorce exist (see Deut 24:1-4), and then divorce ensues, the husband could in no way gain profit from it.

(0.51) (Luk 16:18)

sn The examples of marriage and divorce show that the ethical standards of the new era are still faithful to promises made in the presence of God. To contribute to the breakup of a marriage, which involved a vow before God, is to commit adultery. This works whether one gets a divorce or marries a person who is divorced, thus finalizing the breakup of the marriage. Jesus’ point concerns the need for fidelity and ethical integrity in the new era.

(0.51) (Isa 50:1)

sn The Lord admits he did divorce Zion, but that too was the result of the nation’s sins. The force of the earlier rhetorical question comes into clearer focus now. The question does not imply that a certificate does not exist and that no divorce occurred. Rather, the question asks for the certificate to be produced so the accuser can see the reason for the divorce in black and white. The Lord did not put Zion away arbitrarily.

(0.50) (Mar 10:4)

sn An allusion to Deut 24:1. The Pharisees were all in agreement that the OT permitted a man to write a certificate of dismissal and divorce his wife (not vice-versa) and that remarriage was therefore sanctioned. But the two rabbinic schools of Shammai and Hillel differed on the grounds for divorce. Shammai was much stricter than Hillel and permitted divorce only in the case of sexual immorality. Hillel permitted divorce for almost any reason (cf. the Mishnah, m. Gittin 9.10).

(0.50) (Mat 19:7)

sn A quotation from Deut 24:1. The Pharisees were all in agreement that the OT permitted a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce his wife (not vice-versa) and that remarriage was therefore sanctioned. But the two rabbinic schools of Shammai and Hillel differed on the grounds for divorce. Shammai was much stricter than Hillel and permitted divorce only in the case of sexual immorality. Hillel permitted divorce for almost any reason (cf. the Mishnah, m. Gittin 9.10).

(0.50) (Lev 21:7)

sn For a helpful discussion of divorce in general and as it relates to this passage see B. A. Levine, Leviticus (JPSTC), 143-44.

(0.42) (Rev 2:4)

tn The Greek word translated “departed from” (ἀφίημι, aphiēmi; L&N 15.48) can actually be used of divorce (L&N 34.78), so the imagery here is very strong.

(0.42) (Mal 2:16)

tn Heb “him who covers his garment with violence” (similar ASV, NRSV). Here “garment” is a metaphor for appearance and “violence” a metonymy of effect for cause. God views divorce as an act of violence against the victim.

(0.42) (Dan 11:6)

sn Antiochus II eventually divorced Berenice and remarried his former wife Laodice, who then poisoned her husband, had Berenice put to death, and installed her own son, Seleucus II Callinicus (ca. 246-227 b.c.), as the Seleucid king.

(0.42) (Deu 22:30)

sn This presupposes either the death of the father or their divorce since it would be impossible for one to marry his stepmother while his father was still married to her.

(0.36) (Mar 10:12)

sn It was not uncommon in Jesus’ day for a Jewish man to divorce his wife, but it was extremely rare for a wife to initiate such an action against her husband, since among many things it would have probably left her destitute and without financial support. Mark’s inclusion of the statement And if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery (v. 12) reflects more the problem of the predominantly Gentile church in Rome to which he was writing. As such it may be an interpretive and parenthetical comment by the author rather than part of the saying by Jesus, which would stop at the end of v. 11. As such it should then be placed in parentheses. Further NT passages that deal with the issue of divorce and remarriage are Matt 5:31-32; 19:1-12; Luke 16:18; 1 Cor 7.

(0.35) (Deu 21:14)

sn You have humiliated her. Since divorce was considered rejection, the wife subjected to it would “lose face” in addition to the already humiliating event of having become a wife by force (21:11-13). Furthermore, the Hebrew verb translated “humiliated” here (עָנָה, ʿanah), commonly used to speak of rape (cf. Gen 34:2; 2 Sam 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Judg 19:24), likely has sexual overtones as well. The woman may not be enslaved or abused after the divorce because it would be double humiliation (see also E. H. Merrill, Deuteronomy [NAC], 291).

(0.33) (1Co 7:10)

sn Not I, but the Lord. Here and in v. 12 Paul distinguishes between his own apostolic instruction and Jesus’ teaching during his earthly ministry. In vv. 10-11, Paul reports the Lord’s own teaching about divorce (cf. Mark 10:5-12).

(0.33) (Mar 10:2)

tn The particle εἰ (ei) is often used to introduce both indirect and direct questions. Thus, another possible translation is to take this as an indirect question: “They asked him if it were lawful for a man to divorce his wife.” See BDF §440.3.



TIP #25: What tip would you like to see included here? Click "To report a problem/suggestion" on the bottom of page and tell us. [ALL]
created in 0.10 seconds
powered by bible.org